get_school_details

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full burden. It discloses the return contents in detail ('type, phase, address, capacity, pupil numbers...') and mentions links. It doesn't cover error handling for invalid URNs, but the behavior is clear for a read operation.

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 reasonably concise with a long first sentence listing return fields, followed by a short sentence about links. It's front-loaded and each sentence adds value, though the list could be trimmed.

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?

There is no output schema, so the description compensates by naming many data fields. It doesn't mention pagination, error responses, or how to obtain a URN, but for a single-parameter read tool it is sufficient.

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% with 'urn' clearly described as 'The school's URN'. The description adds minimal extra meaning beyond restating the parameter's purpose. Baseline of 3 applies.

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 identifies the tool's function: 'Get comprehensive details for a specific school by its URN.' It distinguishes itself from siblings like search_schools by specifying the input (URN) and the breadth of data returned.

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 appropriate usage context by requiring a URN, making it clear this tool is for when you already know the school's identifier. It doesn't explicitly name alternatives, but the prerequisite is evident.

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