Get In-Term Grades

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

With no annotations, the description bears the full burden of behavioral disclosure. It says 'Return published in-term grades,' which suggests a read-only operation, but it does not explain authentication requirements, side effects, or what happens when the optional parameters are omitted. The default behavior of a null semester or course is entirely unspecified, which is a meaningful transparency gap.

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, focused sentence that front-loads the action and resource, then adds the most decision-relevant output details. Every clause earns its place, and the final clause about estimating a letter grade provides useful context without redundancy.

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?

Although an output schema existsaine and the parameter count is low, the description leaves critical invocation context unresolved: what null parameters mean, which semester is used when none is supplied, and how this tool relates to obs_get_grades or obs_get_transcript. An agent would need external assumptions or additional tool calls to use it reliably.

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 0%, so the description must compensate, but it only mentions 'semester' indirectly and says nothing about the 'course' parameter. It fails to explain accepted formats, optionality, defaults, or how the two parameters interact, leaving the agent to guess how to scope the request.

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 ('Return published in-term grades') and clearly identifies the resource (a semester's courses) and the data included (mean, standard deviation, rank, weight). It distinguishes itself from siblings like obs_get_grades and obs_get_transcript by focusing on interim components rather than final grades.

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 phrase 'enough to estimate a letter grade before it is posted' implies use during the term before final grades are available, which gives some usage context. However, it doesn't explicitly contrast with obs_get_grades or obs_get_transcript, nor does it state when not to use this tool.

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