list_school_features

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure. It adds a useful context detail ('parsing its sidebar navigation') that implies a read-only operation and reveals the underlying mechanism. However, it does not explicitly state that the tool is non-destructive, whether authentication is required, or how errors are handled.

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 sentence that leads with the action, specifies the target resource, and explains the method. There is no wasted wording or redundant information.

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 simple tool with one parameter and no output schema, the description provides sufficient context: it explains what the tool does and how it works. It could further clarify what 'features' means or what the return format looks like, but these are not critical for a basic listing operation.

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 provides 100% coverage for the single required parameter, including a helpful description for school_id that directs users to list_schools. The description itself adds no additional parameter semantics beyond what the schema already contains, so a baseline score of 3 is appropriate.

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 the tool's function: 'List features available for a specific school by parsing its sidebar navigation.' It specifies the verb (List), the resource (features for a school), and the method (parsing sidebar navigation), which distinguishes it from sibling tools like list_schools or get_feeds.

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?

Usage is implied by the description: it is for listing features for a specific school. However, there is no explicit guidance on when to choose this tool over alternatives, nor any stated exclusions. The schema description does reference list_schools for finding IDs, but the tool description itself lacks direct usage guidance.

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