get-education

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure. The description reveals nothing about return format, whether data might be missing/absent, authentication requirements, or any other behavioral characteristics beyond the obvious getter nature.

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?

One short, clear sentence that communicates the essential purpose with zero wasted words. This is appropriately sized for a no-parameter tool.

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 getter with siblings, the description is minimally adequate but lacks the distinguishing detail that would help an agent choose it over search-priya-profile or get-profile. It doesn't clarify what specific fields/format the education data takes or any limitations.

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, and with 100% schema coverage (there is nothing to document), the schema is complete. The baseline of 4 for zero-parameter tools applies—there is no parameter ambiguity to resolve.

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 states the verb 'Get' and the resource 'Priya Gautam's education details,' which clearly identifies what the tool returns. However, it does not differentiate from siblings like get-profile or get-experience beyond the obvious resource distinction, which is inherent in the name itself.

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?

There is no guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives like get-profile, get-skills, or search-priya-profile. The description provides no context about scenarios where education details are sought or how this differs from broader profile retrieval.

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