get_staffing_dashboard

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint, idempotentHint, and destructiveHint, covering the safety profile. The description adds the metric list and mapping coordinates but no additional behavioral context such as response format or data source limitations. It does not contradict annotations and adds moderate value beyond structured fields.

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 two sentences, front-loaded with the core purpose, then enumerates specific metrics and a usage scenario. Every word earns its place with no redundancy or filler.

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 carries the burden of explaining return value. It lists the key metrics including coordinates for mapping, making the return type fairly clear. However, it could mention whether the result is a single object or array, or how to interpret the metrics, but for a dashboard tool this is adequate.

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?

There are zero parameters, so the description has no burden to explain parameters. The baseline of 4 applies, and no additional parameter details are needed. The description focuses on what the tool returns rather than inputs.

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 the tool returns campus-level staffing metrics for dashboard analysis, listing specific metrics like teacher experience, turnover rate, and student-teacher ratio. This specific verb+resource combination distinguishes it from siblings like get_campus_aggregates, which likely covers broader aggregate data.

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 explicitly instructs to use this tool for comparing staffing differences between charter and traditional campuses without web search, providing a clear use case. However, it does not explicitly mention when not to use it or name alternative tools, so it falls slightly short of full guidance.

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