get_student_summary

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

With no annotations, the description must provide behavioral context. It states the tool automatically searches all schools and returns a JSON object. However, it lacks details on authorization, rate limits, or any side effects, leaving some transparency gaps.

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 concise—two paragraphs plus Args/Returns. The first sentence summarizes the tool's value. Every sentence contributes meaningful information without redundancy or fluff.

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 the tool's aggregated nature and the presence of an output schema, the description covers the key aspects: what data is returned, parameter details, and prerequisites. It could mention limitations like pagination, but for a summary tool, it's reasonably 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 schema has 0% description coverage, but the description fully compensates by explaining each parameter: student_name usage via get_my_children(), since_days default and purpose, and school conditionality. This adds significant meaning beyond the raw schema.

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 retrieves a comprehensive summary for a student, listing specific data types (grades, homework, exams, absences, messages) in one call. It effectively distinguishes from sibling tools that retrieve individual data types.

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 advises using get_my_children() to obtain student names and explains when the school parameter is needed. While it doesn't explicitly compare with alternatives, the context implies this tool is for an aggregated view, not specific use cases.

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