Example-domain usage

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

No annotations provided, so the description carries full burden. It mentions 'maths-specific' and 'example-domain rotation' but does not disclose whether the operation is read-only, side effects, authorization needs, or rate limits. Minimal behavioral context beyond the core function.

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 the purpose. Every word earns its place. No redundancy.

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 parameterless query tool with no output schema, the description sufficiently conveys what the tool returns and its scope. Could be slightly more specific about the data coverage (e.g., all users vs. current), but overall adequate.

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?

No parameters exist, so schema coverage is 100% trivially. The description adds value by explaining the output context (domains used and chapters, maths-specific), which is meaningful beyond the empty schema.

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?

Clearly states the tool reports which example domains have been used and in which chapters, with a specific maths scope. However, it does not explicitly differentiate from siblings like get_curriculum or suggest_fresh_domain, though context signals partially compensate.

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?

No explicit guidance on when or when not to use this tool versus alternatives. The description implies it is for querying domain usage, but lacks explicit usage context or exclusions.

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