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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true, idempotentHint=true, and destructiveHint=false, so the safety profile is covered. The description adds the search scope (course titles and screen text) but does not disclose return format, pagination, or ordering behavior. Given the annotation coverage, this is adequate but not exceptional.

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, compact sentence that front-loads the core purpose (full-text search) and then explains the use case. No redundant words or fluff; every part earns its place.

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 that an output schema exists (provided elsewhere), the schema covers both parameters, and annotations cover safety, the description sufficiently explains what the tool does, when to use it, and what it searches. Nothing critical is missing for an agent to invoke it correctly.

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 100% for both parameters, with clear descriptions for query (words to search) and limit (max courses, default). The tool description adds no extra parameter semantics beyond what the schema already provides, so the baseline of 3 applies.

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 a specific verb (search) and resource (course content), and specifies the scope (course titles and screen text). It also frames the use case: finding which course contains a phrase when the course is unknown, which distinguishes it from list_courses (all courses) and get_course (a specific course).

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 gives an explicit scenario: 'when you don't know which one it is.' This implies when to use it (unknown course) and implicitly contrasts with fetching a known course. However, it does not name specific alternative tools or state explicit when-not-to-use conditions, so it falls short of the highest tier.

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