list_school_features

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

No annotations are present, so the description carries the full burden. It discloses the mechanism (sidebar parsing), per-school variability, and the result shape (list of sections). It does not cover error behavior, but 'List' and 'parsing' make the read-only nature clear.

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 short blocks with purpose front-loaded, illustrative examples, and an Args section. Every sentence earns its place; there is no fluff.

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 one-parameter, read-only list tool with an output schema, the description covers discovery, purpose, and parameter provenance. An agent can invoke it correctly based on this description alone.

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 no parameter descriptions (0% coverage), but the Args block compensates: school_id is explained as 'School ID' and the description points to list_schools for valid values. This is actionable beyond the bare integer 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?

States an explicit action ('List features available'), a specific resource ('for a specific school'), and the mechanism ('by parsing its sidebar navigation'). The return value is clearly described as available sections, distinguishing it from data-fetching siblings like get_feeds or get_calendar_events.

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?

Hints at when to use it per-school because 'Different schools may have different features enabled.' It does not name sibling alternatives or exclusions, but the Args section gives a clear precondition by pointing to list_schools for finding valid IDs.

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