School MCP

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries the full burden. It discloses the data granularity ('for each period') and content types (absences, tardies, reason codes), which helps the agent understand the return structure. However, it lacks disclosure of error behaviors, authentication requirements, or privacy constraints.

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, dense sentence of 12 words that immediately conveys the tool's function. Every clause earns its place by specifying distinct data elements retrieved.

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?

Given the absence of an output schema, the description compensates adequately by enumerating the specific data fields returned (absences, tardies, reason codes, period breakdown). For a simple read-only tool with no parameters, this provides sufficient context for 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?

With zero parameters and 100% schema description coverage, this earns the baseline score of 4. The description correctly omits parameter discussion since none exist.

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 the specific verb 'Get' with the clear resource 'student's attendance record', and distinguishes itself from grade-focused siblings (get_gradebook, get_gpa, etc.) and scheduling tools by specifying unique attendance data: absences, tardies, and reason codes.

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?

The description provides no guidance on when to use this tool versus siblings like get_schedule (which returns period timing but not attendance status) or get_student_info. No prerequisites or exclusion criteria are mentioned.

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