edubase_get_tag

Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint, idempotentHint, openWorldHint, and destructiveHint false, so the safety profile is covered. The description adds no behavioral context beyond the implied GET, and 'check' is ambiguous between existence checking and retrieval. No contradiction exists.

Agents need to know what a tool does to the world before calling it. Descriptions should go beyond structured annotations to explain consequences.

Is the description appropriately sized, front-loaded, and free of redundancy?

The phrase is extremely short, but this is under-specification rather than effective conciseness. It eliminates all supporting context that would help an agent select or invoke the tool correctly.

Shorter descriptions cost fewer tokens and are easier for agents to parse. Every sentence should earn its place.

Given the tool's complexity, does the description cover enough for an agent to succeed on first attempt?

Although the one-parameter schema, output schema, and annotations reduce the burden, the description fails to clarify what 'tag' refers to or when to choose this over resource-specific tag siblings. An agent cannot confidently distinguish edubase_get_tag from edubase_get_class_tag, edubase_get_quiz_tag, and similar tools.

Complex tools with many parameters or behaviors need more documentation. Simple tools need less. This dimension scales expectations accordingly.

Does the description clarify parameter syntax, constraints, interactions, or defaults beyond what the schema provides?

Schema description coverage is 100% and the single required parameter 'tag' is documented as 'tag identification string'. The description adds no parameter-level detail, but the schema already carries this burden, so the baseline 3 applies.

Input schemas describe structure but not intent. Descriptions should explain non-obvious parameter relationships and valid value ranges.

Does the description clearly state what the tool does and how it differs from similar tools?

The description 'Get/check tag' is essentially a restatement of the tool name; it adds 'check' but does not clarify whether the tool fetches a tag or verifies its existence, nor does it identify the tag domain. Among many siblings like edubase_get_quiz_tag and edubase_get_exam_tag, this provides no differentiation.

Agents choose between tools based on descriptions. A clear purpose with a specific verb and resource helps agents select the right tool.

Does the description explain when to use this tool, when not to, or what alternatives exist?

There is no guidance about when to use this tool versus alternatives such as edubase_get_tags or the many resource-specific tag endpoints. The description gives no context, exclusions, or alternative routes.

Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.