Get Mentor

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full disclosure burden, and it says nothing about permissions, whether the call is scoped to the authenticated student, or what happens when no mentor is assigned (a plausible empty case for a faculty-mentor relationship). It only restates the field list, which the output schema already covers.

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?

A single compact fragment with zero waste and the key qualifier ('Assigned') front-loaded. It is terse to the point of being clipped rather than a complete sentence, but nothing is padded.

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?

The tool is simple, parameterless, and has an output schema, so the description need not explain return values. However, for a relationship-derived lookup it omits the one thing an agent would want to know: behavior when no mentor exists and whether results are scoped to the current user.

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?

The tool takes zero parameters, so the baseline is 4. The word 'Assigned' usefully implies the mentor is derived from the caller's identity rather than a passed identifier, which is a small but real addition.

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 names a specific resource (the assigned faculty mentor) and enumerates the returned fields (name/salutation, contact, department), making it distinguishable from siblings like get_profile or get_courses. It is a noun phrase rather than an explicit verb+resource, but the tool name supplies the verb and there is no ambiguity about what this returns.

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 call this versus get_profile (which likely also carries personal/contact data) or any other sibling. No preconditions, no mention of the zero-argument behavior, and no exclusions are stated.

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