save_course_curriculum

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

No annotations provided. Description discloses that it writes to a specific file path (knowledge/courses/{slug}/course.json) and advances to Step 5, which provides behavioral context. It does not mention permissions, idempotency, or side effects, but the file path is a useful detail.

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?

Approximately 80 words in three logical sections: step placement, usage instruction, parameter details. Front-loaded with purpose and step number. No unnecessary words.

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?

Covers purpose, when to call, what it does, and parameters. Output schema exists so return values are not needed. Lacks mention of error states or validation, but given the simplicity of the tool, it is sufficiently complete for an AI agent.

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 has no descriptions (0% coverage). Description adds meaning: slug is the course slug, curriculum_json is a JSON object with 'modules' and 'lessons' arrays, even though schema incorrectly types it as string. This helps the agent structure the JSON correctly.

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?

Description states it is Step 4 of a course build process, specifically saving the approved curriculum. Verb 'save' and resource 'course curriculum' are clear, and the step number distinguishes it from sibling tools like save_course_outline (step 2) and save_course_sources (step 3).

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 instructs to call after the Learning Architect produces the curriculum, and that it advances to Step 5. This provides sequential context. No explicit when-not, but step numbering implies it's the next action after curriculum production.

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