school_year

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

There are no annotations, so the description carries full responsibility for behavioral disclosure. It only states that the tool returns a value, with no mention of authentication requirements, whether the subdomain affects the result, or error behavior. For a tool that likely depends on session/auth state (given the login/auth siblings), this is a meaningful gap.

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 concise sentence with no filler. The key output ('current school year') and a clarifying parenthetical ('starting year') are front-loaded and each part earns its place.

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 tool with no annotations, no output schema, and an undocumented optional parameter, the description is too sparse. It fails to explain the subdomain parameter, whether authentication is required, or what exact value format is returned. An agent may call it correctly by chance, but the definition does not provide enough context to ensure correct invocation.

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 description coverage is 0%, and the description does not mention the 'subdomain' parameter at all. The schema only gives a name and default, leaving the agent to guess what subdomain means and how it affects the school year. The description adds no semantic value for the parameter.

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 a specific verb ('Return') and resource ('current school year'), and adds a useful clarification that it returns the starting year. This unambiguously distinguishes it from the sibling tools, none of which overlap with this purpose.

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 explicit when-to-use or when-not-to-use guidance is provided, and no alternative tools are mentioned. Usage is only implied by the description: an agent would infer to use it when the current school year is needed. This is acceptable for a simple getter but leaves context unstated.

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