list_school_printers

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden. It implies a read-only operation by using 'list' and mentions fetching data from 'printer.json'. However, it does not disclose authentication requirements, rate limits, or how 'this teacher' is determined. The agent infers safety but lacks explicit confirmation.

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 a single sentence that efficiently conveys the purpose, scope, data included, and a usage instruction. Every element is necessary and front-loaded, with no wasted words.

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 the tool has no parameters and no output schema, the description partially compensates by mentioning 'build plate size' and implicitly 'serial_number'. However, it does not fully describe the expected output structure (e.g., all fields, type of list, pagination). An agent might need to infer the complete return format from context.

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?

There are zero parameters, so the baseline is 4. The description adds no parameter details (none needed) but provides context about what the tool returns, which is valuable for an agent deciding to invoke it.

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 clearly states the tool lists school/classroom printers that the teacher can queue to, including build plate size. It distinguishes from the sibling 'list_printers' by specifying the scope ('this teacher can queue to') and includes a specific data field ('build plate size from printer.json').

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 description gives explicit guidance on what to do with multiple results: 'If more than one, ask which serial_number to use.' This directly informs the agent's behavior. However, it does not explicitly state when to use this tool versus alternatives (e.g., sibling 'list_printers' or 'list_school_queues'), though the scope is implied.

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