Record book grades

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

Annotations already declare readOnly/idempotent/non-destructive and openWorld, so safety semantics are covered. The description adds one behavioral fact, the default-to-current-semester scoping, but says nothing about pagination, ordering, or how missing grades for a future semester behave. Adequate but not rich against an already-annotated tool.

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?

Two tight sentences: the first front-loads what is returned and the scope, the second handles the default and the routing to the sibling. No filler or repetition of the title.

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 usefully enumerates the returned fields and explains the default parameter behavior, which is enough for a one-parameter read tool. Minor gaps remain (ordering, behavior for semesters with no grades), keeping it short of a 5.

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% and the single parameter's meaning ('sequential semester number in the study plan') is fully documented in the schema. The description only adds the default behavior (current semester), which is a mild complement rather than new syntax or format detail, so baseline 3 applies.

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?

States a specific resource ('final grades from the ITMO record book (zachetka)') with a concrete scope ('for one semester') and enumerates the returned fields (points, grade, assessment type, date). It also routes the agent away from the similar sibling itmo_get_grade_details, so it is distinguishable from siblings without opening schemas.

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?

Gives clear usage context ('Defaults to the current semester') and explicitly names the alternative (itmo_get_grade_details) for the points breakdown. It does not state any when-not-to-use condition, but the alternative is named precisely enough to route correctly.

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