scorecard_search

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

The readOnlyHint annotation already establishes the safety profile. The description adds the returned fields (tuition, admission rate, etc.) and search/sort capabilities, but does not disclose behavioral details such as pagination behavior, API limitations, or result ordering nuances beyond the schema.

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 four sentences, each providing unique value: purpose, returned fields, search dimensions, and sort options. It is front-loaded with the primary action and contains no filler or redundancy.

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?

With no output schema, the description covers the key return values (tuition, admission rate, graduation rate, median earnings, student debt) and states search/sort options. It lacks explicit notes on pagination or response structure, but the schema documents per_page. Overall, it is complete enough for a straightforward search tool.

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 the parameters are already documented. The description adds conceptual grouping ('Search by name, state, or school type' maps to name, state, ownership) and 'Sort by cost, earnings, or graduation rate' maps to sort, but does not add syntax or format details beyond the schema. Baseline 3 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 specifies a clear verb and resource: 'Search U.S. colleges and universities from the College Scorecard.' It lists returned fields and supports search/sort criteria. However, it does not explicitly differentiate from sibling tools like scorecard_compare or scorecard_top, so it lacks sibling differentiation.

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?

It provides clear context on how to use the tool: 'Search by name, state, or school type. Sort by cost, earnings, or graduation rate.' It implies when to use it but does not state explicit exclusions or alternatives (e.g., when to use scorecard_compare instead).

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