School MCP

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

With no annotations provided, the description must carry the full burden of behavioral disclosure. It adds useful context by explicitly excluding photo binary data from the response, but fails to state whether the operation is read-only, requires specific permissions, or has rate limiting implications.

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 consists of exactly two sentences with zero filler. The first sentence front-loads the core functionality and complete field list, while the second provides a precise negative constraint regarding photo data. Every word 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?

Given the absence of an output schema, the description adequately compensates by listing the five specific data fields returned. However, it stops short of describing the response structure, nesting, or data types, leaving minor ambiguity about how the information is formatted.

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 input schema defines zero parameters. Per evaluation guidelines, parameterless tools receive a baseline score of 4, as there are no parameter semantics requiring clarification beyond what the empty schema structure indicates.

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 resource 'student's profile information' and explicitly enumerates the returned data fields (name, grade level, student ID, birthdate, school). It effectively distinguishes from siblings like get_grades or get_attendance by focusing on static demographic profile data rather than academic or scheduling information.

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 a negative constraint ('Does not return the photo binary') which implicitly sets expectations, but lacks explicit guidance on when to select this tool versus alternatives like get_school_info or get_schedule. No prerequisites, conditions, or 'use when' directives are provided.

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