list_grades

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

Without annotations, the description carries the behavioral disclosure burden. The verb 'List' implies a read-only operation, and 'available grades' suggests the return value is a set of grade options. However, it does not explicitly state that no side effects occur, nor does it describe response format or ordering.

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, clear sentence with no filler. It front-loads the action and object, making the tool's purpose immediately recognizable.

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 simple tool with one enum-constrained parameter and no output schema, the description is reasonably complete: it identifies the input (ranking system) and the expected result (available grades). It does not elaborate on the exact format of grades, but this is a minor gap for such a targeted list operation.

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 coverage is 100%, and the only parameter 'system' has an enum and its own description. The description mainly rephrases the parameter's role ('specific ranking system') without adding new semantic detail beyond what the schema already provides.

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 names a specific verb ('List') and resource ('available grades') scoped by 'ranking system', which clearly conveys the tool's purpose. It distinguishes itself from sibling tools like generate_scopus_query and list_fields, though it does not explicitly contrast with list_fields.

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?

The description implies the tool is used when someone needs grades for a ranking system, but it provides no explicit when-to-use guidance or exclusions relative to siblings. There is no mention of when list_fields or generate_scopus_query would be more appropriate.

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