get_exam_blueprint

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

No annotations provided; the description carries the full burden. Discloses the comprehensive data it returns (domain breakdown, weights, passing score, etc.) and mentions a free practice-exam link, which is sufficient for a read-only tool. No contradictions.

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 sentences, front-loaded with the return content, then usage examples. Every part is necessary and well-structured.

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 one parameter and no output schema, the description covers key aspects: what it returns, acceptable inputs, and a practice exam link. Minor omission like error handling is acceptable for this simplicity.

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 100% with a description for 'exam'. The description adds value by reiterating accepted formats and providing concrete usage examples ('exam_id, exam_code, or certification name'), enhancing understanding 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?

Clearly states it retrieves the full published blueprint for one certification exam, listing specific details. Distinguishes from siblings by focusing on a single exam and contrasting with compare_exams, list_certifying_bodies, and search_exams.

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?

Provides explicit examples of when to call (e.g., 'what's on the X exam') and what inputs it accepts. Lacks explicit when-not-to-use or alternative sibling tool references, but the context is clear enough.

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