Get Course Roster

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure. It effectively describes key behavioral traits: the privacy-sensitive default behavior (returns only instructors and TAs), the optional inclusion of students via a parameter, and the ability to filter by name. However, it doesn't mention potential limitations like rate limits, authentication requirements, or error conditions.

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 the core purpose in the first sentence, followed by usage guidelines and parameter semantics. Every sentence adds value without redundancy, making it efficient and well-structured for quick comprehension.

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?

Given the tool's moderate complexity (3 parameters, no output schema, no annotations), the description is largely complete: it covers purpose, usage, key behaviors, and parameter context. However, it lacks details on output format (e.g., structure of returned data) and doesn't address authentication or error handling, which are minor gaps.

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 100%, so the baseline is 3. The description adds meaningful context beyond the schema: it explains the privacy rationale behind the 'includeStudents' default (instructors/TAs only for privacy) and clarifies the purpose of 'searchTerm' (filter by name), which enhances understanding of parameter usage.

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 clearly states the specific action ('fetch the roster for a course') and resources involved ('instructors, TAs, and optionally students with their names, emails, and roles'). It distinguishes this tool from siblings like 'get_classlist_emails' by specifying it returns a comprehensive roster with roles, not just emails.

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 explicitly states when to use this tool ('when the user asks about classmates, instructor contact info, TA emails, professor names, or who's in a class') and provides clear guidance on alternatives through the 'includeStudents' parameter, distinguishing default behavior (instructors/TAs only) from full class list retrieval.

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