Get Study Credit Summary

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

With no annotations, the description must carry the full behavioral burden, and it adds nothing beyond the field list. It does not state whether authentication or session cookies are required (relevant given the 'check_auth_status' and 'set_session_cookies' siblings), whether the call is read-only, or what happens when a student record cannot be resolved.

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 well-formed sentence that front-loads the verb and then lists the returned data. No filler or redundancy, though the enumerated field list is slightly dense for one sentence.

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?

An output schema exists, so return-value details need not be described, and the single optional parameter is fully documented in the schema. However, for a zero-annotation tool with an overlapping sibling and implicit auth/session dependencies, the definition stops short of the behavioral context an agent needs to choose and call it confidently.

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%, and the schema already explains that study_id is optional and auto-discovered when omitted. The description does not mention study_id at all, so it adds no meaning beyond the schema; baseline 3 applies.

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 gives a specific verb ('Retrieve') and enumerates the concrete resource contents: credit progress, earned credits per semester, enrolled credits, and remaining graduation credits. That distinguishes it from most siblings, but it does not explicitly separate it from the closely named 'get_study_progress_check', which an agent could plausibly confuse it with.

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?

There is no explicit when-to-use or when-not-to-use guidance, and no mention of the alternative 'get_study_progress_check'. The only implied condition is that the caller wants credit/graduation data, which the agent must infer from the field list.

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