bb_courses

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the burden. It clarifies that include_all=True broadens results to every course and organisation, but omits any auth prerequisite (bb_login) and read-only/side-effect guarantees, leaving behavioral profile partly implied by the verb 'List'.

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?

A single front-loaded sentence with the core purpose first and the parameter nuance in a compact parenthetical. No filler or redundancy.

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 one optional boolean parameter, an output schema present, and no nested objects, the description is nearly complete for a simple list tool. The main omission is any mention of the login/authentication prerequisite that sibling tools imply.

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 0% and the schema only labels the field 'Include All' as a boolean defaulting to false. The description compensates by explaining that the flag switches from 'current' courses to every course and organisation you're enrolled in, which is genuine meaning beyond the schema.

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 (List) and resource (Blackboard courses) with a scope qualifier (current). It is clear what the tool returns, but it never names or contrasts itself with siblings like bb_browse or bb_upcoming, so differentiation is left to inference.

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?

There is no explicit guidance on when to use this versus alternatives such as bb_browse, bb_upcoming, or bb_download. The parenthetical hints at the include_all toggle but says nothing about selection context or prerequisites.

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