School MCP

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

No annotations provided, so description carries full burden. Discloses calculation logic (accounts for assignment weight and existing grade) and return format (percentage) since no output schema exists. Lacks explicit safety declaration (read-only) and edge case handling (impossible targets).

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?

Three sentences with zero waste: purpose (sentence 1), behavioral logic (sentence 2), output format (sentence 3). Front-loaded with specific action.

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?

Adequate for a calculation tool with 3 well-documented parameters. Compensates for missing output schema by specifying return format. Lacks only edge case documentation (e.g., unattainable targets) to be complete.

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 coverage is 100% with clear descriptions for all 3 parameters. Description mentions 'assignment's weight' and 'existing grade' implying lookup behavior beyond inputs, but does not elaborate on parameter syntax or validation beyond schema.

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?

Specific verb (Calculate) + resource (score/grade) + scope (upcoming assignment to reach target). Distinguishes from retrieval siblings like get_gradebook and simulation siblings by focusing on single-target calculation.

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?

Implies use case (planning for upcoming assignments), but fails to explicitly differentiate from sibling simulate_grade_scenario or state when to prefer this over ask_about_grades. No explicit 'when not to use' guidance.

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