attendance_bell_schedule

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

With no annotations, the description must carry the behavioral burden, but it only restates the main function. It does not disclose whether the optional pk filters a returned list, whether omitting it returns all periods, or what the response shape is.

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?

A single front-loaded sentence that immediately states the action and resource. There is no filler or redundant restatement of the tool name.

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?

The tool is simple (one optional parameter, no output schema, no annotations), and the description captures the core return concept of time ranges. However, it leaves the pk filtering behavior and response format to inference, so it is only minimally complete.

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?

Schema coverage is 100% and 'pk' is already documented as 'Optional period ID', so the baseline is 3. The description adds no parameter-level detail beyond the bell-schedule context.

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 names a specific verb ('Get') and resource ('teaching period time ranges / bell schedule'), making the core function clear. It is distinct from nearby schedule tools like attendance_daily_schedule, though it does not explicitly name or contrast siblings.

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 when-to-use guidance is provided beyond the bare statement of purpose. The description does not mention alternatives, prerequisites, or contexts where another schedule tool would be preferred.

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