speechwire_get_judge_school

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

No annotations provided, so description carries full burden. It describes the return type (dict with specific fields) but lacks details on side effects, authentication, or error handling. Adequate but not deep.

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?

Description is compact and front-loaded with the purpose. Uses a clear docstring format with minimal waste; every sentence adds value.

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 one required parameter and no output schema, the description adequately documents the return structure. It is mostly complete for a simple query tool, though annotations would strengthen behavioral context.

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%, but the description adds meaning by stating the parameter is a numeric judge identifier from speechwire_list_judges, which is beyond the schema's bare type definition.

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?

Description clearly states 'Get the school (team) a judge is associated with.' It uses a specific verb ('Get') and resource ('school/team'), distinguishing it from sibling tools like speechwire_get_judge_contact or speechwire_get_judge_availability.

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?

Description implies usage after listing judges, mentioning the parameter comes from speechwire_list_judges. However, it does not provide explicit guidance on when not to use this tool or alternatives.

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