List Degree Faculties

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

Annotations already declare readOnly, idempotent, non-destructive, and openWorld, so the safety profile is fully covered. The description adds that the ids are the "official" ones from the public degree-plan form, a useful scoping detail, but says nothing about caching, freshness, or return shape.

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?

A single front-loaded sentence with no filler; the scope qualifier ("used by the public OBS degree-plan form") earns its place by disambiguating the resource.

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?

An output schema exists, so return values need not be described, and the zero-param signature plus full annotations leave little to explain. The only gap is the missing link to the sibling tools that consume these ids (e.g., build_degree_plan / list_degree_programs).

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 tool takes no parameters, so semantics are moot; baseline for a zero-param schema is 4. The description correctly offers no parameter guidance because none is needed.

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?

States a specific verb ("List") and resource ("official faculty/unit ids used by the public OBS degree-plan form"), which cleanly distinguishes it from sibling list_degree_programs and obs_list_programs. The only ambiguity is the "faculty/unit" pairing, but an agent can still identify the resource.

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?

Context is implied by tying the ids to the "public OBS degree-plan form," suggesting it feeds into degree-planning flows, but it names no alternative tool and gives no explicit when/when-not condition. No mention of list_degree_programs or build_degree_plan as the downstream consumer.

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