pup_get_student

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

Annotations already mark the operation as read-only. The description adds meaningful behavior by noting that the default response is a projected summary and that passing raw: true returns the untouched API record. It does not discuss auth or error behavior, but for a simple read-only fetch this is adequate.

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?

Two short sentences with the core purpose front-loaded and the raw modifier placed second. There is no filler or redundant information.

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 simple read-only fetch by ID with full schema coverage, the description sufficiently communicates what the default output includes and how to get the raw record. It does not describe not-found or error behavior, but that is a minor gap given the tool's simplicity.

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 both parameters are already documented. The description reinforces the raw: true behavior but does not add meaning beyond the schema's 'unprojected API record' wording. student_id is already described as coming from pup_list_students.

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 that the tool returns one student's complete record and specifically calls out the default dismissal plan per weekday, which is a distinctive resource detail. It is clearly distinguishable from sibling tools like pup_list_students and pup_get_school.

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 phrase 'One student in full' implies use when a single student's detailed record is needed, and the dismissal plan mention signals a likely use case. However, it does not explicitly contrast this tool with alternatives such as pup_list_students or pup_get_plan, so the when-to-use guidance is mostly inferred.

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