portal_lesson_plans

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

There are no annotations, so the description must carry the behavioral burden. 'Get' signals a read-only operation, and 'for the student' scopes the data, but the description does not explain what happens by default, how the week parameter affects output, or what response format to expect. This is adequate but not rich.

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, direct sentence that conveys the core purpose without redundancy. Every word earns its place, and no filler or repetition exists.

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 one-optional-parameter lookup tool, the description covers the basic purpose and the schema covers the parameter. However, without usage guidance or clarification of how this differs from related portal tools, the definition is only minimally complete for reliable selection and 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?

The schema already fully describes the single optional 'week' parameter with 100% coverage, so the description needs to add little. The description does not misinterpret or conflict with the schema, but it also does not enrich the parameter semantics beyond what is already present.

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 a specific verb ('Get') and a clear resource ('lesson plans / curriculum content'), making the tool's purpose immediately understandable. It does not explicitly distinguish itself from sibling tools like portal_materials or portal_courses, but 'lesson plans' is specific enough to be reasonably differentiated.

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?

No guidance is provided about when to use this tool versus alternatives such as portal_materials or portal_courses. The description only states what the tool does, leaving an agent to infer when it is the right choice.

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