alphaportal_list_grades

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

The readOnlyHint annotation already covers the read-only nature, so the description does not need to restate it. However, the description adds no behavioral context beyond the basic list operation – no mention of ordering, filtering, pagination, or any side effects. Given the annotation covers safety, the description adds almost no value beyond the name.

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, compact sentence with the action upfront and the expected output clearly stated. Every word earns its place, and there is 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?

For a zero-parameter, read-only list tool with no output schema, the description adequately specifies the returned fields (id + name). It lacks usage context but within its scope it is complete enough for correct invocation. A slightly richer note on when to use it would push it to 5, but it is not deficient.

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 no parameters, and schema coverage is 100%, so the baseline is 3. The description does not need to add parameter details because there are none. It correctly omits any parameter explanation, which is appropriate.

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 explicitly states the verb 'List' and the resource 'district grade levels', and specifies the returned fields (id + name). It is immediately clear what the tool does and distinct from siblings like list_schools or list_students, which target different resources.

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 that this tool is used when one needs grade level information, but it does not explicitly contrast it with alternatives or state when not to use it. No mention of exclusions or preferred contexts, so it relies on the agent's inference from the resource name.

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