list_courses

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

No annotations are provided, so the description must carry the full behavioral burden, but it discloses nothing about read-only safety, permissions, side effects, pagination, or output shape beyond a fragment of returned data. No behavioral trait is stated or implied by the description text itself.

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 a single short fragment. While brief, it is under-specified rather than concise, and it does not front-load an actionable verb or usage context that would help an agent decide to call it.

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 tool with no annotations, 0% schema coverage, and one undocumented parameter, the description is incomplete. Although an output schema exists so return values need not be explained, the description still fails to clarify scope, usage, or parameter meaning.

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?

There is one parameter ('year') with 0% schema description coverage, so the description must compensate by explaining its meaning or format. It does not mention the parameter at all, leaving an undocumented optional argument.

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 names the resource ('Student courses') and some returned fields ('teachers and class IDs'), plus a scope hint ('DP program'), but uses a noun phrase with no verb, so the action must be inferred from the tool name. It does not distinguish this tool from any sibling, leaving purpose vague.

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 gives no indication of when to use list_courses versus alternatives like list_announcements or list_calendar, nor any prerequisites or filtering context. There is no usage guidance at all.

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