get_outcome_mastery_distribution

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true and openWorldHint=true. Description adds basic context about optional filters but no additional behavioral traits like pagination or performance. Adequate but not enriched.

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?

Single concise sentence with no redundancy. Front-loaded with key action and resource. Every word earns its place.

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?

No output schema provided; description does not explain what the distribution contains (e.g., counts per mastery level). For an analytics tool with 8 parameters, more context is needed for complete understanding.

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%, so schema documents all parameters. Description summarizes key filters (students, outcomes) but does not add meaning for optional parameters like exclude or include_alignment_distributions. Meets the baseline.

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?

Clear verb 'Get' and resource 'mastery distribution analytics', specifying scope 'for outcomes in a course' and optional filters. Distinct from sibling outcome tools like get_outcome_results and get_outcome_rollups.

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?

Implies usage for mastery distribution analytics but does not explicitly compare to siblings or state when not to use. No alternatives mentioned, leaving the agent to infer from tool naming.

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