lms_get_courses

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true and destructiveHint=false, so the safety profile is covered externally. The description adds the return contents (course names, LMS IDs, links), which is useful since no output schema exists, but it discloses nothing about scope limits, pagination, or whether archived/hidden courses are included.

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 short lines, front-loaded with the action and scope, followed by the return payload. No filler sentences and nothing redundant.

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 parameters and no output schema, the description carries the burden of explaining what comes back, and it does list the returned fields. The only gap is routing guidance relative to the very similar lms_get_course sibling.

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?

The tool takes zero parameters, so there is nothing for the description to disambiguate; baseline 4 applies. The description correctly conveys that no input is required.

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 ('Получить список доступных учебных курсов студента') in a named system (СЭО БГУИР / Moodle), and the plural 'курсов' implicitly separates it from the singular sibling lms_get_course. It does not, however, explicitly name that sibling or contrast the scope, 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?

The phrase 'доступных ... студента' implies the context (current student's enrolled courses), which is enough to infer when to call it. But there is no explicit when-to-use statement, no prerequisites, and no mention of the singular lms_get_course alternative for fetching one course's details.

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