get_student_fulltest_history

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden. It only states the purpose and does not disclose behavioral traits like read-only nature (implied but not stated), authentication requirements, rate limits, or side effects. The description adds minimal transparency beyond the purpose.

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, concise sentence in Vietnamese that front-loads the usage context. It covers the key purposes without unnecessary words, though it could be structured to better separate different use cases.

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 has 8 optional parameters and no output schema. The description does not explain what the output contains (e.g., list of tests with scores, trends), how parameters interact (e.g., when multiple identifiers are provided), or handle edge cases. More context is needed for a tool with this complexity.

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?

All 8 parameters have descriptions in the schema (100% coverage). The tool description provides overall context but does not add extra semantics for parameters beyond what is in the schema. Baseline 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 is for querying FULL TEST/LR history, recent tests, score trends, and progress. It uses specific verbs like 'hỏi' (ask) and 'xem' (view) and specifies the resource. While it doesn't explicitly differentiate from siblings like get_student_latest_scores, the focus on history and trends distinguishes it.

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 begins with 'Dùng khi hỏi...' (Use when asking about...), providing clear usage context. However, it does not mention when not to use this tool or suggest alternatives, such as when only latest scores are needed.

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