get_course_contents

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full burden. It discloses that the tool returns current-user delivery status and grades and that it accepts either a course ID or URL, but it does not mention read-only behavior, required permissions, pagination, or other side effects.

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?

Two short sentences deliver the resource scope, the contents returned, and the accepted input format with no filler. The most important information is front-loaded.

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 retrieval tool with two parameters and no output schema, the description gives a reasonable account of return contents and input format. However, it omits any explanation of the account parameter and any caveats about behavior, so it is adequate but not complete.

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 clarifies that course_id accepts either an ID or a course URL, but it never explains the optional account parameter, leaving part of the input semantics undocumented.

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 that the tool returns a course's classwork grouped by topic, including assignments with submission status and grade, questions, and materials. This is specific and distinguishes it from siblings like get_assignment or list_announcements, though it does not explicitly name the contrast.

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 context of when to call this tool is implied by describing the aggregate course content it returns, but there is no explicit guidance on choosing it over list_pending_assignments, get_assignment, or list_announcements, nor any exclusions.

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