Retrieve a student's dashboard details, including school, grade, classes, and teachers, by providing their student ID.
Get student dashboard information including school, grade, classes, and teachers.
Args: student_id: Student ID (use list_schools to see available students)
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| student_id | Yes |
Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.
v0.3.0Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
There are no annotations, so the description carries the full burden. It only implies a read operation via 'Get' and provides no details about permissions, authentication, side effects, or data shape. This is minimal behavioral disclosure.
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 appropriately short and front-loaded with the key purpose. The 'Args' section is somewhat redundant with the schema but does not add harmful bulk.
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?
For a tool with no annotations and no output schema, the description is too thin. It gives the result categories but omits return shape, any required prerequisites, and a correct route to obtain a valid student_id. The misleading list_schools reference leaves a critical gap.
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 explain the parameter. It adds that student_id identifies a student and suggests a source for it, but that source is wrong (list_schools instead of list_students). This makes the hint counterproductive.
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 states a clear verb and resource ('Get student dashboard information') and lists the composed data fields (school, grade, classes, teachers). This distinguishes it from generic lookups like get_student and list_students, though it does not explicitly name a sibling.
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 when-to-use versus alternative guidance is provided. The only usage hint, 'use list_schools to see available students', is misleading because list_schools presumably lists schools, not students; the correct sibling would be list_students.
Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.