search_by_major

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

No annotations provided, so description carries full burden. It accurately describes the data returned and emphasizes accuracy over averages, but lacks broader behavioral context such as authentication requirements, rate limits, or side effects. Adequate but not rich.

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?

Two sentences, front-loaded with purpose, each sentence adds value. No fluff or repetition.

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?

Given 5 parameters and no output schema, the description explains what data is returned (earnings, debt, tuition) and why it's useful. Sufficient for an agent to understand the tool's output without additional documentation.

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 coverage is 100%, so baseline is 3. Description does not add meaning beyond schema for parameters like 'major' accepting CIP codes (already in schema description). No additional semantic value or constraints beyond what schema provides.

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?

Description clearly states 'Compare the same major across different colleges' and lists specific metrics (median earnings, median debt, in-state tuition). It distinguishes from sibling tools like get_college_details, search_colleges, and search_scholarships by focusing on cross-college major comparisons using field-of-study data.

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?

Explicitly states when to use (comparing majors across colleges) and contrasts with school-wide averages, implying alternative. Does not explicitly mention when not to use or list sibling tools by name, but the context is clear.

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