get_course_details

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure. It clearly implies a read-only operation by using 'Get' and lists the returned data, but it does not explicitly state that it has no side effects, nor does it mention authentication, rate limits, or error behavior. Useful but incomplete for a no-annotation tool.

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 compact and well-structured: purpose first, then return details, then parameter definition. Every sentence earns its place with no redundancy or filler.

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 single-parameter getter with an output schema available, the description is sufficiently complete. It explains the parameter source, what data will be returned, and implies a read-only operation. The output schema covers the detailed response shape, so no return-field listing is needed.

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 has 0% coverage for course_id, but the description compensates fully by defining it as 'ID of the course (from get_courses).' This adds provenance and role beyond the raw integer type, leaving no ambiguity about the single parameter.

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 specific verb and resource: 'Get full details of a Garmin Connect course by ID.' It further specifies the exact return contents (metadata, elevation gain/loss, total distance, waypoints), making it clear and distinguishable from siblings like get_courses (listing) and download_course_gpx (download format).

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 tells the agent the course_id comes 'from get_courses', which implies a preceding list call. This is useful contextual guidance, though it does not explicitly name alternative tools or state when not to use this tool.

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