calculate_parcoursup_points

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the burden. It states the tool 'Estimate' and 'Returns estimated score', clearly indicating a read-only computation. This is adequate for a simple calculator, but lacks details on potential side effects or accuracy.

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 three sentences long, getting straight to the point. It is concise and well-structured, though the mention of 'coefficients per subject' could be more aligned with the schema.

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?

There is an output schema, so return value details are not needed. However, the description mentions inputs not present in the schema (coefficients per subject), suggesting the tool may require more parameters than defined. This mismatch makes the description incomplete and potentially misleading.

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 input schema has 100% coverage with descriptions for both parameters. The description adds a mention of 'grades and coefficients per subject', which is not fully reflected in the schema (only bac_average and option_bonus). This adds some context but also introduces slight inconsistency.

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 verb 'Estimate' and the resource 'Parcoursup admission score', indicating its function. However, it does not differentiate from the sibling tool 'calculate_parcoursup_score', which likely has a similar purpose, thus reducing clarity.

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 specifies its use for 'French university candidates', providing context. It lacks explicit guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives like 'calculate_parcoursup_score' or other education calculators, and does not state when not to use it.

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