Metis · Course Builder — Start Course Build

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries full burden. It lists actions (creates, adds, returns) but does not disclose authorization needs, side effects, or whether the operation is reversible. Basic transparency is present but not comprehensive.

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 concise (under 100 words), front-loaded with the main purpose, and organized with clear sections for args and returns. Every sentence adds value with no 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?

Given the tool's complexity (4 parameters, output schema exists), the description fully explains the effect on the database and the return value (Course ID, confirmation, questionnaire). No critical information is missing.

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%, meaning the JSON schema provides no descriptions. The description compensates by giving clear explanations for each parameter (e.g., topic: 'The subject or title of the course'). This adds significant meaning beyond the schema's titles and defaults.

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 it starts a new course build pipeline, creates a course record, adds a placeholder row, and returns an intake questionnaire. It distinguishes from sibling tools like publish_course or save_course_curriculum by focusing on the initial pipeline step.

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 implies this tool is for starting a course build, but it does not explicitly state when to use it versus alternatives like save_course_curriculum or publish_course. No guidance on prerequisites or context is provided.

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