list_course_ratings

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

Beyond the readOnly/idempotent/non-destructive annotations, the description discloses important behaviors: no pagination, all ratings returned at once, most-recent-first ordering, learner feedback is untrusted data, and the required analytics:read OAuth scope. This is substantial and decision-relevant context for an agent.

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 front-loaded with purpose, then covers pagination, safety, and authentication in compact, clearly separated statements. Every sentence adds information and there is no filler or unnecessary repetition.

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?

With an output schema present, the description does not need to explain return values. It covers scope, pagination, ordering, trust boundaries, and auth requirements. The only notable gap is the undocumented filter_student_id parameter, but the description is otherwise complete for a read-only listing tool.

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 0%, so the description carries the burden of explaining parameters. It only says 'Requires course_id' without explaining its semantics beyond the obvious, and it completely omits the optional filter_student_id parameter. This is a meaningful gap for a tool with only two parameters.

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: 'Read the star ratings and written feedback students left on one course.' It clearly scopes the tool to a single course and a particular data type, but it does not explicitly differentiate it from siblings such as get_course_analytics.

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 clear usage context: it requires course_id, returns all ratings at once, is not paginated, and orders results most-recent-first. It does not state explicit when-not-to-use conditions or name alternatives, but the scoped 'one course' phrasing and lack of obvious rating-related siblings make the intended use clear.

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