list_my_observeesList the students linked to your observer account for parent or mentor access; returns an empty list for regular student accounts.
List the students you are linked to as an observer, for parent or mentor accounts. Read-only. Returns an empty list for regular student accounts.
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
No arguments | |||
Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.
v1.0.1Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
Annotations already declare readOnly/idempotent/non-destructive, so the safety profile is covered. The description adds meaningful value by disclosing the edge-case return behavior (empty list for regular student accounts), which annotations cannot convey. Minor redundancy in restating 'Read-only' but not harmful.
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?
Three short, front-loaded sentences with zero waste: purpose, safety, and edge-case behavior in order of importance.
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 zero-parameter, no-output-schema list tool the description is nearly sufficient, covering purpose and the empty-result edge case. Complete enough to invoke correctly, though it doesn't describe what each returned student entry contains (acceptable given no output schema).
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?
Zero parameters, so the schema carries no semantics to convey and the baseline is 4. The description correctly implies a no-argument call.
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?
States a specific verb (List) and resource (students linked as observer) and clearly scopes it to parent/mentor accounts. An agent can immediately distinguish this from enrollment or course-user listing siblings.
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?
The audience constraint ('for parent or mentor accounts') and the 'returns empty list for regular student accounts' note give clear context on when this tool is applicable. It doesn't name a specific alternative sibling, but the applicability condition is well-defined.
Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.