Mis aulas

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

The annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true, destructiveHint=false and openWorldHint=false, so the safety profile is covered by structured data. The description adds useful context beyond that: the result is scoped to the teacher account and includes the caller's role per classroom, which hints at the payload shape. It stops short of describing pagination, ordering, or behavior when the user has no classrooms.

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, each earning its place: the first states scope and output, the second states ordering relative to other tools. The bracketed tag front-loads account type and read-only nature before any prose.

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?

With no parameters and no output schema, the description carries the burden of telling the agent what comes back, and it does (classrooms plus your role, plus the classroom_id it enables). A brief note on empty-result behavior or ordering would make it fully complete.

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 tool takes zero parameters, so there is nothing for the description to disambiguate and the baseline of 4 applies. The description correctly implies a no-argument call by framing it as a personal listing.

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?

"Lista las aulas donde eres administrador o profesor, con tu rol en cada una" gives a specific verb (listar) and resource (aulas) plus the filtering scope (admin/profesor) and the returned role. It is clear on its own, though it never names a sibling such as list_courses to draw the boundary explicitly.

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?

"Úsala primero para obtener el classroom_id" is explicit sequencing guidance that tells the agent this is the entry point before other classroom-scoped tools. There is no when-not guidance or named alternative, which keeps it short of a 5.

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