Get Studenti Online Career Summary

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

Beyond the annotations (readOnlyHint, openWorldHint), the description adds critical behavioral context: it parses from a single logged-in capture, uses best-effort selectors, and degrades fields to empty rather than failing. This disclosure is essential for the agent to understand reliability and potential edge cases.

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 consists of two concise sentences plus a note, all front-loaded with key information. Every sentence serves a purpose: stating the action, specifying the output, and warning about reliability. There is no redundancy or verbosity.

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's low complexity (3 parameters, no required, no output schema), the description adequately covers what the tool does and its limitations. It explains the return content and the best-effort nature. Missing details like how to obtain the cookies/session_id are inferable from sibling tools.

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 67% (2 of 3 parameters have descriptions). The tool description does not add any parameter-level information beyond what the schema already provides. Since coverage is high, a baseline of 3 is appropriate; no additional value is needed.

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 uses a specific verb ('reads') and clearly identifies the resource (the student's Studenti Online home page into a career summary). It lists the components of the summary (greeting/identity, enrolled course of study, in-progress requests), which effectively distinguishes it from sibling tools like sol_get_services or sol_get_env_session.

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 explicitly states 'Read-only; never submits requests or payments,' clarifying the non-destructive nature. It implies usage when a student's career summary is needed. However, it does not explicitly contrast with alternatives or specify when not to use, which would elevate it to a 5.

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