Syllabus Digest

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

Annotations already declare readOnly/idempotent/non-destructive, so the safety profile is covered (the 'Read-only' sentence is largely redundant). The description adds genuine behavioral context the annotations do not: it is 'a rough text heuristic,' warning the agent that extraction may be approximate or incomplete.

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 short sentences with zero waste: purpose first, safety/heuristic caveat second, alternative routing last. Every sentence earns its place.

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 no output schema, the description conveys what the result contains (lines resembling dates, grade weights, policies) and sets expectations about fidelity. A brief note on output shape would make it fully self-sufficient, but nothing essential for correct invocation 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?

There is only one parameter and schema description coverage is 100%, with the schema itself saying to get the ID from list_courses. The description adds no syntax or format detail beyond that, 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 ('Pull a course syllabus and extract lines that look like dates, grade weights or policies') and names the sibling that returns the raw text, so the agent can distinguish syllabus_digest from get_syllabus without opening either schema.

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 to 'get_syllabus' when the full text is needed, which is a real alternative and condition for selection. It stops short of stating when this tool should not be used at all (e.g., syllabus absent), but the routing guidance is clear.

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