tutor_turn

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

Annotations already indicate readOnlyHint=false, so the description doesn't need to disclose mutation fully. It adds value by stating the host model should use suggested_reply_to_learner, but it does not explicitly mention side effects like logging the learner's message or state changes. With annotations covering safety, the description provides moderate behavioral context.

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 two sentences long, front-loading the purpose and outputs, followed by a critical usage instruction. Every sentence serves a purpose with no unnecessary words.

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 an output schema present, the description focuses on output nature and usage. It could mention prerequisites (e.g., session must exist) but overall provides sufficient context for an agent to invoke the tool correctly.

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?

Input schema has 100% coverage with clear descriptions for both parameters. The tool description adds no additional meaning beyond the schema, so a baseline score of 3 is appropriate.

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 clearly states the tool's purpose: 'Continue a tutor session' with specific outputs (next move, suggested reply, excerpts). The verb 'continue' and resource 'tutor session' are precise, and it naturally distinguishes from siblings like tutor_start (starts a session) and tutor_record_mastery (records mastery).

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 usage context via the verb 'continue' and the context of a tutor session, making it clear that this tool is for ongoing sessions after tutor_start. However, it does not explicitly state when not to use it (e.g., before a session is started) or mention alternative tools.

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