get_class_affiliation

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true, signaling a safe read. The description adds no additional behavioral context beyond that, which is acceptable but not enhanced.

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 with no superfluous words. It is appropriately sized for a simple retrieval tool, earning its place without waste.

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 simple get-by-ID tool, the description is adequate but lacks information about the output schema or return structure. Since there is no output schema, the description could offer a hint about the returned fields.

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 input schema has one parameter (id) with 0% description coverage. The description does not elaborate on the parameter, leaving the agent to infer its purpose from the tool name and type alone.

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 it gets class affiliation details by ID, distinguishing it from sibling tools like list_class_affiliations (list all) and create/update/delete (mutations). However, it does not specify what 'details' includes, lacking specificity.

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 implies usage for retrieving a single entity by ID, but provides no explicit guidance on when to use versus listing or other operations. No context or exclusions are mentioned, making it functional but not instructive.

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