alphaportal_list_grades

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true and openWorldHint=true, so the safety profile is covered. The description adds only the return shape (id + name), which is mild extra value; it says nothing about ordering, completeness of the district-wide list, or freshness of the data.

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?

A single short sentence carrying the verb, the resource, its scope (district-level), and the payload fields. Nothing is padded and the key information is front-loaded.

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 with no output schema, the description supplies enough: what is listed, at what scope, and the fields returned. A note on ordering or whether the list is exhaustive would close the remaining gap.

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 tool takes zero parameters, so there is no parameter semantics to document – the baseline for a parameterless tool is 4. The description does not need to compensate for any schema gap here.

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 verb and resource ('List the district grade levels') and even names the returned fields (id + name), so the agent knows exactly what it gets back. It does not, however, differentiate itself from siblings like alphaportal_list_schools or alphaportal_list_students beyond the resource noun.

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?

Usage is implied by the resource: this is reference-data lookup for grade levels. There is no explicit when-to-use, no statement of prerequisites, and no routing to or away from any sibling, so an agent must infer the context.

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