khda_list_curricula

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

Annotations already declare readOnly, idempotent, non-open-world and non-destructive, so safety is covered structurally. The description's one added signal is the word 'snapshot', implying static pre-captured data rather than live results, which is genuinely useful context but is not elaborated.

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?

A single front-loaded sentence that names the resource first and puts the illustrative examples in parentheses. No filler and nothing to trim.

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 zero-parameter, read-only enumeration with an output schema and full annotation coverage, the description says enough to call it correctly. Only the meaning of 'snapshot' (which snapshot, how current) is left unstated.

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 the schema has nothing for the description to supplement. Baseline 4 applies; there is no parameter behavior left unexplained.

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 a specific verb ('List') and resource ('curricula') and grounds the result set with a concrete example list (British, IB, CBSE). It is distinguishable from khda_search_school and khda_list_areas by resource, but it never explicitly contrasts itself with those siblings.

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?

Usage is only implied: the description conveys that this enumerates the fixed set of curricula, which an agent would want before filtering schools, but it never states when to use it versus khda_search_school or any prerequisite/exclusion.

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