schoolpass_get_school_info

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint, openWorldHint, and idempotentHint, covering the safety profile. The description adds context about the actual content returned (configuration features, dismissal windows), which enriches the agent's understanding beyond the annotations. No contradictory or missing behavioral traits are present.

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, focused sentence with no filler. The core purpose and content examples are front-loaded, and every word contributes. It is appropriately sized for a simple read-only operation.

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?

The description gives a clear overview of what is returned (basic info and per-school configuration), with a couple of examples. It does not enumerate all fields or describe the exact response structure, but given the absence of an output schema and the simplicity of the tool, it is adequate. A more detailed enumeration would improve completeness, hence a 4 rather than 5.

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 has zero parameters, so the baseline is 4. The description does not need to explain parameter semantics because there are none; the schema trivially covers the empty property set.

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 clearly states a specific verb ('Get') and resource ('basic school info and per-school configuration'), and gives concrete examples (features enabled, dismissal windows). This distinguishes it from sibling tools like schoolpass_whoami (identity) and schoolpass_get_profile (user profile), which target different objects.

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 usage for retrieving school-level settings but does not explicitly contrast it with alternatives or state when not to use it. Given the sibling set, the purpose is self-evident, but explicit routing guidance is missing.

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