invite_parent

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full burden. It discloses that it requires PS_ENABLE_WRITES (write operation), emails the guardian, and supports resend. It doesn't describe error behavior or side effects in detail, but the core behavioral traits are transparent.

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 compact and well-structured: the first sentence states purpose and prerequisite, the second explains behavior, and the third provides parameter details. No filler, each sentence 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?

For a simple two-parameter write tool, the description covers the essential context: when to use it, where to get the ID, and the prerequisite. It does not mention the output or error cases, but the output schema exists and the rules state descriptions need not explain return values. It is complete for correct 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?

Given 0% schema description coverage, the description compensates by explaining user_id as 'Guardian's user ID (from list_parents)' and implying it should be for an unregistered guardian. school_id is only restated as 'School ID', which adds minimal value, but the description meaningfully enriches user_id semantics.

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 action ('Send (or resend)') and the resource ('ParentSquare registration invitation to one guardian'). It distinguishes itself from sibling tools like list_parents (listing), add_parent (adding), and bulk_invite_parents (bulk) by focusing on the single-invite scenario.

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 practical guidance: it tells the agent to get user_id from list_parents and to only invite guardians with registered=false. It also notes that the same endpoint handles resends. It doesn't explicitly contrast with bulk_invite_parents, but the context is sufficient for correct selection.

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