discover_education_sources

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries full burden. It discloses that results are fetched from TWCampus directory, prioritizes local directory, and clarifies TWCampus is not a resource warehouse but a router. No side effects mentioned, but read-only nature is implied.

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?

Four sentences with no redundancy. Front-loads purpose, then provides parameter details and behavioral notes efficiently.

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?

Given the tool has 4 parameters (simple types), no enums, and an output schema (not shown), the description covers core purpose, return fields, and parameter hints. Misses explanation for subject param and error handling, but overall adequate.

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 0%, so description must compensate. It explains education_stage possibilities, implies query is a search term, and mentions max_sources limit. However, subject parameter is not explained, leaving ambiguity.

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 states the tool discovers official education platforms from TWCampus directory, up to max_sources. It specifies the return fields (name, official_url, categories, directory_source) and distinguishes itself from siblings (browse_education_source, read_education_resource) by focusing on discovery and routing.

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 provides possible values for education_stage (國小, 國中, 高中, 大學, 技職, 全階段) and notes TWCampus is only a routing directory, implying when to use. However, it lacks explicit when-not-to-use guidance or alternatives beyond the sibling names.

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