motimate_get_moti_progress

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the behavioral disclosure burden. It conveys read-only behavior through 'Zeigt' and describes filtering behavior, but it does not disclose output shape, pagination, permissions, or what exactly constitutes 'Lernfortschritt'. This is adequate but thin.

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 two short, front-loaded sentences with no filler. The first sentence identifies the action and object; the second states the filtering options. Every word earns its place.

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?

For a simple read tool with two optional parameters, the description provides enough to invoke it. However, since there is no output schema, it does not clarify whether the result is per-user progress, aggregated progress, or a list of records, leaving the agent to infer the return shape.

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 100%, with both parameters already explained in the schema. The description's mention of filtering by Schulungs-ID or Nutzer-ID adds only a slight rephrasing of the schema semantics, so it provides no meaningful additional value.

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 action ('Zeigt' = shows) and a specific resource ('Lernfortschritt von Nutzern in einer Schulung'), and identifies the two relevant filter dimensions. It does not explicitly differentiate from sibling tools, though 'progress' is a distinct concept from the chapter/content/search siblings.

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 usage contexts: retrieve progress for a specific training or user, or for all via empty IDs. However, it gives no explicit guidance on when to prefer this tool over alternatives like motimate_get_moti_chapters or motimate_search_motis, and no when-not-to-use conditions.

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