get_subjects

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden. It only restates the operation implied by the name ('Get all subjects') and does not disclose potential side effects, authentication needs, pagination, or error behavior. Minimal value beyond the tool name.

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 a single, clear sentence that front-loads the core purpose. It avoids unnecessary detail, though this brevity comes at the cost of missing useful context.

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?

With no annotations and no output schema, the description must provide context like authentication requirements, whether a subdomain is needed, and what data is returned. None of this is present, so the description is under-specified for an agent choosing among many sibling tools.

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, and the description does not explain the 'subdomain' parameter at all. Since the parameter is optional and undocumented in both schema and description, an agent cannot infer its meaning or effect on the result.

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 uses a specific verb ('Get'), identifies the resource ('subjects'), and specifies scope ('all... in the school'). It distinguishes the tool from sibling getters for other entities (e.g., get_periods, get_students), though it doesn't clarify what qualifies as a subject or how it differs from similar getters like get_classes.

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?

No context is given for when to use this tool versus alternatives such as get_periods or get_timetable. There is also no mention of required prerequisites—like being logged in—despite the presence of authentication-related siblings (login, auth_status). The agent is left without routing guidance.

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