Get Outcome Rollups

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

The annotations already communicate read-only behavior (readOnlyHint=true) and open-world context. The description adds little behavioral information beyond what the schema lists, such as optional filtering and aggregation. It does not mention response shape, pagination, or other runtime behavior, and it does not contradict the 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?

The description is a single concise sentence with the main verb-resource pair front-loaded. It contains no filler. Minor ambiguity exists in the phrase 'filtered by ... sort options', but overall it is efficient.

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?

This is a parameter-rich tool with 11 parameters, no output schema, and many outcome-related sibling tools. The description does not explain what an outcome rollup represents, what the response contains, or when to prefer this tool over get_outcome_results. The schema covers parameter names, but the description alone is not enough for complete call context.

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 description coverage is 100%, so the baseline is 3. The description adds only a high-level summary of options ('aggregated or filtered by students, outcomes, and sort options') without explaining the parameter semantics more deeply than the schema already does.

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 states a clear verb and resource: 'Get outcome rollups for a course.' It also indicates the main capabilities of aggregation and filtering. It does not explicitly distinguish itself from the similar sibling 'get_outcome_results', but the term 'rollups' supplies enough differentiation for a basic understanding.

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?

There is no guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives such as get_outcome_results or get_outcome_contributing_scores. The description implies usage for rollups but provides no exclusions, prerequisites, or decision criteria.

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