refinery_get_schools

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

The readOnlyHint and destructiveHint annotations already establish that this is a safe read operation. The description adds valuable behavioral context beyond annotations by disclosing that this is a paid lookup ($0.25 via x402) with a configuration flag to disable payment.

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 short sentences with no filler. The core action and lookup key are front-loaded, and the cost note is placed separately for clarity.

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 single-required-parameter read-only tool with an output schema, the description is largely complete: it states what is retrieved, how it is retrieved, and the cost. It does not offer explicit usage routing to sibling tools, but that is not a critical gap for this simple operation.

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 description names ZPID as the lookup key, which aligns with the required zpid parameter. However, it does not mention the optional response_format parameter or the params wrapper structure. The schema provides some description for these fields, but the schema coverage signal is low, so the description only partially compensates.

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 and resource: 'Get the school ratings near a property by ZPID.' It clearly distinguishes this from sibling tools like price history and tax history by naming the school-ratings domain and the property-lookup key.

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 the intended use case: retrieve school ratings when you have a ZPID. However, it does not explicitly state when to use this tool instead of refinery_get_property, refinery_get_price_history, or refinery_get_tax_history, nor does it mention exclusions or alternatives.

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