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

The readOnlyHint annotation already indicates a read-only operation, and the word 'List' reinforces this. The description does not add further behavioral details such as pagination or response shape, but those are not required given the annotation coverage.

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 two short sentences with no redundant wording. The key purpose is front-loaded, and the clarifying note about curriculum_semester is placed where it is most useful.

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?

The description is sufficient for understanding the core operation and the unusual meaning of curriculum_semester. There is no output schema, but the simple list nature of the tool and the parameter descriptions in the schema provide enough context for a caller.

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 description adds meaningful clarification for curriculum_semester, which is not otherwise explained in the schema. Most other parameters already have schema descriptions or are self-explanatory, such as program_code, limit, and fields.

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 the tool lists a program's curriculum courses, giving a specific verb and resource. It also disambiguates curriculum_semester as a program position rather than a teaching term, which helps distinguish it from other course-related tools.

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 identifies the basic use case but does not explicitly contrast it with sibling tools such as seneca_search_courses or seneca_get_course. The curriculum_semester clarification provides some usage guidance, but no alternative tools or conditions are mentioned.

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