get_advanced_placement

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

The readOnlyHint annotation already signals safety, and the description adds meaningful behavioral context: the returned units are not graded and do not affect QPA. This is useful nuance beyond the schema and annotation, though the description does not detail the output structure—mitigated by the presence of an output schema.

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 compact and front-loaded. The first line summarizes the content, the second line gives direct usage guidance, and the final line clarifies an important semantic distinction. No 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?

For a zero-parameter, read-only tool with an output schema, the description covers what it returns, when to call it, and how the data behaves (ungraded, no QPA impact). Nothing essential is missing.

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 has zero parameters, so the description has no parameter-level burden. The baseline of 4 applies here since no parameter documentation is needed.

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?

Description clearly states the resource ('AP and transfer credit') and what it returns ('courses credited... and the AP exam scores behind them'). It also differentiates from graded coursework by explicitly noting units are not graded and do not factor into QPA, distinguishing it from the sibling get_grades.

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?

Provides explicit trigger conditions: 'Call this when the user asks about AP credit, transfer credit, or exam scores.' This gives clear when-to-use guidance and implicitly differentiates it from grade-related tools.

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