get_course

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

No annotations are provided, so description carries the burden. It describes the retrieval operation but doesn't mention side effects, data freshness, or error cases. For a read tool, some behavioral context is missing, but it's not misleading.

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?

One sentence with no waste and the key detail (sections and seat availability) front-loaded. Could add a hint about sibling tools, but compact is good.

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?

Output schema exists and covers return structure. But without annotations or sibling differentiation, the description is sufficient for a simple lookup yet still lacks guidance about where course_id comes from and the relation to search_course_ids.

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 0%, so the description must compensate. It identifies course_id as the lookup key by naming the resource, but doesn't explain how to find course IDs or what format/edge cases exist. Better than nothing, but minimal.

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 uses specific verb 'Get' with resource 'CVC course', and adds 'including available seats for each section' as useful detail. It doesn't explicitly differentiate from siblings, but it is clear what it does.

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?

No explicit when-to-use guidance or mention of alternatives. Context signals show siblings like scrape_courses, but description doesn't route. Implied usage: retrieving a single course by ID. Barely above no guidance.

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