Get RPS Attendance Register

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true and openWorldHint=true. The description adds 'Read-only' (redundant) and specifies the return content (hours and percentage), providing some value beyond annotations. However, it does not disclose any behavioral traits like authentication failure handling or data freshness.

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 a single, front-loaded sentence that efficiently conveys the tool's purpose and output. Every word adds value, with no redundancy or unnecessary detail.

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 the tool has 3 parameters and no output schema, the description provides essential return content. However, it omits prerequisites (e.g., need for a valid session), authentication steps, and does not clarify how the tool relates to sibling tools, leaving gaps for a complete understanding.

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?

With schema description coverage at 67%, the description adds no information about parameters beyond what the schema already provides. Parameters like 'cookies' and 'session_id' are not mentioned, missing an opportunity to explain authentication flow or fallback logic.

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 the tool reads the authenticated student's RPS attendance register, specifying the exact data returned (per-subject hours and percentage). It effectively distinguishes from sibling tools like 'rps_get_attendance_records' by focusing on aggregated register data.

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 lacks any guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives. It does not mention prerequisites, when not to use, or explicitly compare with the sibling 'rps_get_attendance_records' tool, leaving the agent to infer usage context.

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