list_announcements

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 says nothing about read-only safety, result ordering, pagination, or scope limits. 'List' implies a read, but that is inferred from the name rather than disclosed.

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 short sentence, front-loaded with the resource and the filter capability. Nothing is wasted, though the terseness leaves the definition under-specified rather than merely brief.

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?

An output schema exists so return values need no explanation, but for a two-parameter tool with zero schema coverage and no annotations the description is thin: no year format, no ordering/pagination behavior, and no differentiation from the many sibling list tools.

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 description coverage is 0%, so the description is the only source of parameter meaning; it does name both parameters (tenant, year) and marks them as optional filters. However, it gives no format or type detail (e.g., expected academic-year string format) beyond what the names already suggest.

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 the resource ('School announcements') clearly enough that an agent knows what is returned, but it omits the verb and never distinguishes itself from close siblings such as list_notifications or schoolmail_search. It is a noun phrase rather than a specific operation statement.

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 phrase 'optionally filtered by tenant/year' hints that filtering is available, but there is no guidance on when this tool should be chosen over list_notifications or the schoolmail alternatives, and no exclusions or prerequisites are stated.

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