get_student_suspend_status

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

No annotations are provided, so the description must carry the full burden. It explains the tool checks for specific statuses, which is helpful. However, it does not state whether it is a read-only operation, any side effects, or required permissions. The behavioral insight is partial.

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 that front-loads the usage context. Every word earns its place, and there is no wasted 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?

The description lacks details about the output format or structure. With no output schema, the agent does not know what the tool returns (e.g., a boolean, a list of statuses). The complexity of 7 parameters is not fully addressed.

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%, so the baseline is 3. The parameter descriptions in the schema are already detailed (email, userid, etc.). The tool description does not add significant meaning beyond the schema, though it lists the statuses checked.

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 checks if a student is in various restrictive states like suspended, locked, reserved, etc. It uses a specific verb-resource combination and distinguishes itself from sibling tools that cover other aspects (e.g., attendance, summary).

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 explicitly starts with 'Dùng khi' (Use when), providing a clear usage context. However, it does not mention when not to use this tool or suggest alternatives, which would further improve guidance.

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