get_district_detail

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

Adds rich behavioral context beyond annotations: pagination via cursor/next_cursor, include_total flag, meta_fields options, payload.table/exports, and follow-up requirements when needs_follow_up or has_more is true. Consistent with readOnlyHint, openWorldHint=false, and idempotent annotations.

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?

Though detailed, every sentence serves a purpose: usage example, local data assurance, pagination mechanics, response structure, and follow-up instructions. The structure front-loads the core purpose and then layers essential operational details.

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 no output schema, the description compensates by detailing payload.table, exports, and pagination/completeness fields. It provides enough information for an agent to know what to expect and when to make follow-up calls.

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 coverage is 100%, but the description explains how cursor and include_total work together for pagination, and the purpose of meta_fields/campus_meta_fields. This adds meaning beyond the raw schema definitions.

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 opens with 'Return district summary plus its campuses' and provides a concrete example, clearly identifying the resource and scope. This distinguishes it from siblings like get_district (which likely returns only district data) and search_campuses (which is campus-centric).

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?

Explicitly states when it's useful ('show all campuses in Houston ISD' style prompts) and instructs not to search the web. However, it does not explicitly name alternative sibling tools for cases where district context is unnecessary, leaving some room for ambiguity.

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