APIbase

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

Annotations cover safety profile (readOnly/idempotent), so description adds value by disclosing specific data fields returned (admissions rate, costs, outcomes, earnings) and the external data source (College Scorecard). Does not mention rate limits or caching behavior, preventing a 5.

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?

Single efficient sentence front-loaded with the action. The em-dash effectively lists representative return fields without verbosity. No redundant phrases or filler text.

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?

For a single-parameter lookup tool with rich annotations, the description is complete. It compensates for missing output_schema by listing specific data categories returned. Could mention if data is cached or real-time for a 5, but adequate for complexity level.

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% with comprehensive parameter description including example (166027 for MIT) and cross-reference to college_search. Main description mentions 'by UNITID' but doesn't add syntax details beyond the schema. Baseline 3 is appropriate when schema does the heavy lifting.

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 uses specific verb 'Get' with clear resource 'detailed data for a US college' and specifies the key 'UNITID'. It distinguishes from sibling 'education.colleges.search' by specifying the ID-based lookup pattern and referencing College Scorecard data source.

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?

Explicitly indicates prerequisite workflow by stating 'by UNITID' and the parameter description explicitly references sibling tool 'college_search' for obtaining IDs ('Get IDs from college_search'). Clear when-to-use (when you have a specific UNITID) vs. when to use the search alternative.

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