Metis · Course Builder — Save Course Outline

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

With no annotations, the description carries full responsibility. It states the tool saves the outline and advances if approved is True. However, it does not explain side effects (e.g., overwriting), validation of input, or error conditions. The behavior is adequately described but lacks detail on edge cases.

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 well-structured with an initial sentence, then 'Args:' and 'Returns:' sections. It is concise overall, though the parameter details could be slightly trimmed without losing meaning.

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?

The description covers the tool's purpose, parameters, and its place in a multi-step process. It mentions a return value ('Confirmation and next-step instructions'), but does not detail validation or error handling. Given the output schema exists, this is mostly complete.

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 description adds significant meaning to each parameter: slug is linked to start_course_build, outline_json format is exemplified with module structure, and approved is explained with its effect. Since schema descriptions are absent (0% coverage), this compensates fully.

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 verb 'Save' and the resource 'course outline'. It specifies the step context ('after Step 2 (Scope Plan)') and that it advances to Step 3. This distinguishes it from sibling tools like save_course_curriculum and save_course_sources.

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 says to call the tool 'once the user has reviewed and approved the module outline' and that 'approved must be True to advance'. This provides clear context, but it does not mention when not to use it or alternative tools for earlier/later steps.

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