Get Course Roster

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries the burden of behavioral disclosure. It reveals a key privacy-related default: 'By default returns only instructors and TAs for privacy' and explains that includeStudents provides the full class list. This goes beyond the schema's default value by adding rationale and context. It does not cover permissions or result formatting, but the central behavioral trait is transparent.

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?

Three sentences with no filler. The first sentence states the core operation and scope, the second gives concrete usage triggers, and the third explains the default and how to override it. Every sentence earns its place and key information is front-loaded.

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 simple fetch tool with no output schema and no annotations, the description plus fully documented schema covers the essential aspects: what is returned, default behavior, and when to use it. It does not mention truncation or search filtering, but those are already explained in the parameter descriptions. Minor gap: no explicit note about the response shape, but the content description suffices.

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%, so the baseline is 3. The description adds marginal value by explaining includeStudents in terms of the default privacy behavior, but it does not elaborate on limit, searchTerm, or courseId beyond what the schema already provides. This is adequate but not exceptional.

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: 'Fetch the roster for a course' and enumerates the contents (instructors, TAs, optionally students) plus names, emails, and roles. It gives clear use cases (classmates, instructor contact info, TA emails, professor names), but does not explicitly differentiate from the sibling get_classlist_emails, so it falls short of a 5.

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 explicitly says 'Use this when the user asks about classmates, instructor contact info, TA emails, professor names, or who's in a class,' giving clear context for when the tool is appropriate. It does not name any alternative tool or provide exclusions, so it earns a 4 rather than a 5.

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