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

Annotations already establish read-only, non-destructive, open-world behavior. The description adds genuinely useful context beyond them: it returns EVERY course, in the Courses-page order, and requires the user's Cotlet API key with app access — an auth prerequisite the agent cannot infer from annotations.

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?

Five short sentences, front-loaded with what is returned before usage and auth details; no filler or repetition. Slightly fragmented (auth note appended at the end), but each sentence carries information the agent needs.

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 one-optional-boolean read tool with no output schema, the description compensates by naming the returned fields and ordering, plus the auth requirement. An agent has everything needed to invoke and interpret the call; only pagination behavior is unaddressed.

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%, so the baseline is 3. The description earns above baseline by explaining the semantic intent of `published` ('only the courses students can enroll in'), which clarifies the business meaning beyond the schema's terse 'Only published courses. Default: all.'

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 and resource ('Courses in your school') and enumerates the returned fields (name, published state, URL), so an agent can immediately tell what it gets. It also positions itself relative to siblings by noting course_id is consumed by 'the other tools', distinguishing it as the course-enumeration entry point.

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?

Guidance is present: 'Use course_id from each item in the other tools' tells the agent why to call it, and 'Set published to see only the courses students can enroll in' tells when to pass the flag. It lacks explicit when-not-to-use or a named alternative, but no competing sibling exists in the Teachable family.

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