scrape_course_ids

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

No annotations are present, so the description must carry the behavioral disclosure burden. It does disclose important operational traits: slower performance, experimental status, and external browser/driver requirements. However, it does not mention failure modes if Chrome/driver is missing, whether this is read-only, or how scraping behaves under 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?

Three short sentences, front-loaded with the core purpose, followed by the dependency warning and the preferred alternative. Every sentence earns its place with no filler or repetition.

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 supplies strong high-level context: it identifies the fallback nature, the external dependency, and the preferred sibling. But with five parameters completely undocumented and no mention of required college_name or filter behavior, it is only partially complete for invoking the tool correctly despite the presence of an output schema.

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%, and the description adds no parameter semantics at all. It never explains college_name (the required field), c_id, course_name, course_symbol, or max_results, nor how these filters combine or behave with 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 states a clear verb-resource pair: 'Search CVC course IDs' via a headless Chrome browser. It also differentiates itself from the sibling search_course_ids by labeling itself as an experimental fallback, so an agent can distinguish the tools.

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?

'Prefer search_course_ids for ordinary searches' is an explicit routing instruction to a sibling. The description also gives concrete selection context: it is slower, experimental, and requires Chrome/Chromium plus a compatible driver.

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