get_tutor

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint, idempotentHint, openWorldHint, and destructiveHint=false, but the description adds no behavioral context on top of them. It does not mention what a 'tutor' is, how lookups behave, whether results can be missing, or any other operational detail.

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 description is technically short, but this is under-specification rather than effective concision. The two words simply repeat the tool name and provide no useful structure or additional information.

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?

For a simple read-by-ID tool with rich annotations and an output schema, the bare description is minimally usable: the agent can infer that it fetches a tutor by UUID. However, it lacks any context about selection criteria, desired usage, or relationship to the many sibling 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% for the single parameter, with tutor_id described as 'Tutor UUID'. The description itself adds no parameter-level meaning, but the schema already carries that burden adequately.

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 Tutor' is a tautology that restates the tool name and title without adding any detail. It identifies the resource but does not differentiate this tool from sibling tools such as get_student, get_parent, or get_lesson_participant.

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 on when to use this tool versus alternatives. Given the large set of sibling tools, an agent cannot determine from the description why it would choose get_tutor instead of another get_* or list_* tool.

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