search_students

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure. It reveals partial matching, case-insensitivity, pagination defaults, and the maximum page size. This goes beyond a simple 'search' statement, though it omits possible edge cases like empty results or behavior when name is null.

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 and well-structured with a clear purpose statement followed by Args and Returns sections. Each line provides essential information without redundancy or fluff, making it easy to scan.

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?

The tool is simple with 3 optional parameters, and the description covers search behavior, pagination, and return type. It does not explicitly state what happens when name is omitted (likely returns all) or describe 'basic information' fields, but the presence of an output schema probably covers return structure. Overall, it is adequate but not exhaustive.

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 description explains all three parameters with meaningful context: name is optional and used for partial matching, page defaults to 1, and page_size defaults to 20 with a max of 100. Since the schema has no descriptions (0% coverage), the description fully compensates by adding semantics and constraints.

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: 'Search for students by name (partial, case-insensitive match).' It specifies the verb (search), the resource (students), and the filtering behavior (partial, case-insensitive). This distinguishes it from sibling tools like list_students (likely lists all) and get_student (likely fetches by ID).

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 when a name search is needed, but it does not explicitly contrast with sibling tools such as list_students for unfiltered lists or get_student for exact retrieval. It provides clear context but no exclusions or alternative recommendations, falling short of explicit guidance.

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