Get Course

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

Annotations already declare readOnly, idempotent, non-destructive and openWorld, so the safety profile is covered; the description's "Read-only" is largely redundant. Where it adds real value is the field-level preview of what the response contains, which matters because no output schema exists. It leaves unstated what happens with an invalid or inaccessible course ID.

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?

Two sentences, both earning their place: the first delivers purpose plus return contents, the second delivers routing and the safety note. No filler or restatement of the title.

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-parameter read tool with full annotation coverage and no output schema, the description supplies everything needed: what comes back, how to get the ID, and which sibling to prefer for the syllabus. Nothing an agent needs in order to call it 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% and the single course_id parameter already documents the numeric-string format with an example and points at list_courses. The description's mention of list_courses duplicates that rather than adding new semantics, so the baseline of 3 applies.

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 ("Get full details for one course") and enumerates the returned fields (name, code, term, dates, syllabus, public description). It is clearly distinguishable from list_courses (which yields IDs) and get_syllabus (plain-text syllabus).

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?

Explicitly routes the agent: use list_courses to obtain course IDs, and use get_syllabus when only the plain-text syllabus is needed. Both the prerequisite step and the sibling alternative are named with the condition that selects them.

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