enrich_student_list

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint and openWorldHint. The description adds useful behavioral context: the credit cost per student and that it returns profile URLs and basic info. It does not contradict annotations and enriches the disclosure beyond structured fields.

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, direct sentences. Every word earns its place, with the main action front-loaded and no fluff.

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?

Given 8 parameters, 4 enums, and no output schema, the description is somewhat sparse. It doesn't explain the credit model for enrich_profiles or pagination, but the tool is a straightforward list operation. Adequate for basic understanding, but gaps remain for a tool of this complexity.

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 baseline is 3. The description mentions 'basic info' and 'profile URLs' but does not add parameter-level meaning or clarify things like enrich_profiles implications or page_size behavior 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?

The description clearly states 'List students of a school' with a specific verb and resource, and adds return content ('profile URLs and basic info') that distinguishes it from siblings like enrich_employee_list or enrich_school_profile.

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 (need a school context, implied by 'of a school' and required school_url parameter) but provides no explicit when-to-use guidance or comparison to alternatives. No exclusions or conditions are mentioned.

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