get_student_latest_scores

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

No annotations provided, and description does not disclose behavioral traits (read-only, auth, rate limits, side effects). It only describes functionality, not how the tool behaves.

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?

Description is one sentence with multiple clauses, conveying purpose without fluff. Though a bit run-on, it is efficient and front-loaded with key 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?

With 7 optional parameters and no output schema, description does not guide parameter selection or specify return format. Lacks info on how to identify the student or handle empty results.

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 description coverage is 100%, so parameters are already documented. Description adds no extra meaning beyond listing tasks; it does not clarify parameter interaction or recommended usage patterns.

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?

Description clearly lists specific tasks: latest scores, LR/Speaking/Writing scores, latest full test, weakest/strongest parts. This distinguishes it from siblings like get_student_fulltest_history which focuses on history.

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?

Description states 'use when asking about...' implying context but does not explicitly exclude other tools or mention alternatives. For example, it could note to use get_student_fulltest_history for non-latest tests.

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