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

The description adds substantial behavior beyond the read-only annotations: matching is a case-insensitive phrase against course names and descriptions, results are ordered by name, courses without slugs are omitted, catalog-hidden courses are included, and at most 10 results are returned. It also discloses the exact return shape and next-step handoff to `fetch`.

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 dense but well structured, leading with purpose and then layering pairing, matching rules, result behavior, and sibling alternatives. Every sentence contributes actionable information for an agent.

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 simple one-parameter schema, available output schema, and read-only annotations, the description covers everything needed: purpose, matching rules, result limits, edge cases, return shape, and next steps. No critical calling context is missing.

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 schema already documents the `query` parameter. The description still adds useful matching semantics and practical guidance about using one or two distinctive words, though it does not add new formal parameter constraints.

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 states a specific verb and resource: it searches this Cubite site's courses by keyword and returns public page URLs. It also explicitly distinguishes itself from the sibling `course_list` tool, which is for listing rather than keyword search.

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?

It explains exactly when to use this tool: for linking to or citing courses, as the search half of the search/fetch pair, and advises using one or two distinctive words. It also names the alternative `course_list` for inventory-style listing and `fetch` for retrieving citable text from a result.

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