list_courses

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

There are no annotations, so the description must carry the transparency burden. The verb 'list' implies a read-only operation and the phrase 'del usuário' conveys the scope, but the description does not explicitly mention authentication, side effects, ordering, or pagination.

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 concise sentence with no filler. The core action and scope are presented directly and all words contribute meaning.

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?

Given zero parameters, the presence of an output schema, and the low complexity, this description is sufficiently complete. It states what resource is returned and for whom, leaving no critical invocation details missing.

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?

The tool has zero parameters and the schema describes nothing, so the baseline for this dimension is 4. There are no parameter semantics for the description to enhance.

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 uses the specific verb 'list' with a clear resource (courses) and adds the scope 'en los que está inscrito el usuario' (courses the user is enrolled in). This distinguishes it from sibling tools like get_course_contents or get_site_info.

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 makes the tool's purpose clear, so when an agent needs the user's enrolled courses the usage is easy to infer. However, it does not explicitly state when to use it over sibling tools, nor does it mention any exclusionary cases.

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