peri_inscriptions

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

With no annotations, the description discloses that no reservation or cancellation is made, confirming read-only behavior. It also warns that the payload format is portal-version dependent and must be captured from an authenticated session, adding important behavioral context 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?

Three sentences, front-loaded with the purpose, each sentence adds distinct information: purpose, non-mutation, payload dependency. No wasted words.

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 lack of output schema and annotations, the description covers the read-only nature and payload requirement but omits details about response format or potential error conditions. It is adequate for a simple read tool but not fully comprehensive.

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?

The single 'payload' parameter has no schema descriptions (0% coverage). The description adds that the payload format is portal-version dependent and must be captured from an authenticated session, providing some origin and dependency context, but it does not specify internal structure or required fields.

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 'Read current peri-school inscriptions through the authenticated browser session,' using a specific verb (Read) and resource (peri-school inscriptions). It distinguishes from siblings by emphasizing read-only and the authenticated session context.

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 requires an authenticated session ('through the authenticated browser session') but does not explicitly compare to alternatives or state when not to use. No exclusions are mentioned, so guidance is only implied rather than explicit.

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