get_attendance

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full behavioral burden, and it discloses almost nothing: it does not state whose attendance is returned (self vs. all students), whether a date range is implied, permission requirements, or the read-only nature beyond the weak 'get' verb. The parenthetical about percentage/present/absent is return-value content, which the existing 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 sentence that front-loads the resource and its contents with no filler. It is a fragment rather than a fully formed sentence, but it wastes nothing.

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?

With zero parameters and an output schema covering return values, the definition is nearly adequate. The critical missing piece is disambiguation from get_attendance_day, which the description never addresses, leaving the selection decision incomplete.

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 of 4 applies; there is no parameter syntax the description could or should clarify.

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 (attendance) and enumerates what is returned (summary, session records, percentage, present/absent), so the purpose is clear. However, it draws no distinction from the sibling get_attendance_day, leaving the agent to guess which attendance tool to pick.

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 when-to-use guidance, no prerequisites, and no mention of the obvious alternative get_attendance_day in the sibling list. The agent gets no signal about when this aggregate tool is preferred over the day-level one.

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