absence_summary

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

No annotations are provided, so the description bears the full burden. It does not disclose side effects, authentication needs, or behavioral traits like whether it is read-only. The phrase 'with a risk status' hints at computed data but is not explained.

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 short sentence, which is front-loaded and to the point. However, it could be slightly expanded with key details without losing conciseness. It is adequate but minimal.

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 one parameter and an output schema (not shown), the description is borderline adequate. It covers the core purpose but omits details about the 'risk status' and any constraints. For a simple tool, it meets a minimum viable standard.

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 schema has 0% description coverage, and the description does not explain the single parameter 'enrollment_id' beyond its existence. No details on format, validation, or typical usage are given, leaving the agent to guess its meaning.

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 shows absences used versus the enrollment limit with a risk status. It implicitly distinguishes from 'list_absences' which lists individual absences, and 'grade_summary' which deals with grades. However, a more explicit verb like 'Returns' or 'Computes' would improve clarity.

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?

No guidance is provided on when to use this tool versus siblings such as 'list_absences' or 'grade_summary'. The description does not mention prerequisites, limitations, or alternatives, leaving the agent without context for appropriate invocation.

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