scan_students

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full burden and does well: it discloses the discovery scope (EDUPAGE_SUBDOMAINS or every school), account-type-conditional output, one-record-per-student-per-school granularity, and that results are cached to avoid redundant API calls. It omits auth/permission requirements and failure modes, keeping it short of a 5.

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?

Front-loaded with the core action and scope, then adds account-type and granularity detail. Four sentences with minimal waste; the multi-school clarification is slightly wordy but earns its place by pinning down the return cardinality.

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?

Zero params and no output schema mean the description must convey the return shape, which it does (one entry per student per school). Scope, account dependence, and caching are all covered; only auth/error conditions and cross-sibling disambiguation are 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 takes zero parameters, so there is nothing to document and the baseline of 4 applies. The description correctly avoids inventing parameter behavior and instead clarifies what the no-argument call returns.

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?

Names a specific verb ('Discover') and resource ('all students') and clearly scopes it to the logged-in account across the discovery scope. However, it never distinguishes itself from close siblings like get_students, get_all_students, get_my_students, or find_student, so an agent cannot route between them from the description alone.

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?

It explains account-dependent semantics (parent = linked children, student = classmates), which implies the tool's context of use. But it gives no explicit when-to-use, when-not-to-use, or alternative ('use X instead'), leaving the agent to infer which of the several student-listing siblings to call.

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