get_school_term

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries the full transparency burden. It explicitly states that the tool returns a summary string and a structured object containing term details, week number, school days elapsed/remaining, and the full 2026–2027 schedule. This clarifies the read-only nature and output composition, though it doesn't discuss edge cases or date-range limitations.

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, information-dense sentence that front-loads the core purpose and then concisely lists the returned data. It avoids unnecessary filler while providing essential details. Slightly dense but efficient.

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 tool with only two parameters and no output schema, the description sufficiently explains the return payload and region options. It mentions the full schedule range, which is useful context. It doesn't explain error conditions, but for the tool's simplicity, the description is largely complete.

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 schema description coverage is 100%, so the schema already documents both parameters (date and region). The description adds only minor context (e.g., 'ANZ region' and the region codes), but nothing fundamentally beyond the schema. Baseline 3 applies because the description doesn't need to compensate.

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 uses a specific verb ('Determine whether') and a clear resource ('falls within a school term'), while enumerating all valid ANZ region codes. It distinguishes itself from siblings like is_public_holiday or get_next_business_day by focusing solely on school-term membership.

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 clearly establishes the context for use (given a date and region) and implies its utility for school-term-related queries. It doesn't explicitly name alternatives or state when not to use it, but the covered regions and return details give sufficient context without exclusions.

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