schoolpass_submit_dismissal_change

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

Beyond annotations (readOnlyHint:false), the description discloses the critical dry-run behavior: without confirm:true no change is made and a preview is returned, and with confirm:true it submits and re-reads the calendar to verify. This adds meaningful behavioral context not available in the schema or 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?

Three sentences, all information-dense. The purpose is front-loaded, the confirm-gating behavior is clearly separated, and the ID sourcing is a single sentence. Some minor complexity in the last sentence, but no wasted words.

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 covers the essential behavior, the confirm gate, and ID sourcing. With no output schema, it even hints at the post-submit verification ('re-reads the calendar'). It doesn't enumerate all change_type-move_to_id dependencies, but the schema already handles that, so the description is adequately complete.

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 coverage is 100%, so params are already documented. The description adds extra semantics by explaining that move_to_id can be a dismissal location id or a carpool moveToId from the calendar, and that student_id comes from schoolpass_list_students. This helps disambiguate parameter values beyond the schema.

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?

Clearly states the tool submits a dismissal/arrival change for a student on a single date, with a specific verb and resource. It lists example change types and explicitly distinguishes from the sibling cancel tool by naming the action. No ambiguity.

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?

Provides explicit sourcing instructions for the two key identifiers (student_id, move_to_id) from sibling tools, and describes the confirm-gated flow so the agent knows to set confirm:true to actually submit. It doesn't explicitly state when not to use this tool (e.g., vs cancel), but the context is clear.

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