blackboard_find_syllabus

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

Annotations already declare readOnly, idempotent, openWorld and non-destructive, so the safety profile is covered. The description adds that REST attachments are included and that candidates with IDs are returned, which is useful but modest context beyond the annotations.

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 tight clauses, front-loaded with the core action and followed by the return behavior. Little waste, though the parenthetical 'incluye adjuntos REST' is somewhat cryptic.

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 read-only, idempotent search tool with no output schema, the description does mention the return shape (candidates with IDs), but it omits how it relates to sibling search tools and the title/text/filename wording has no matching parameter, leaving a gap an agent cannot resolve.

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 coverage is 75% (maxDepth/maxItems/maxResults documented, courseId not), so the baseline is 3. The description names search dimensions (title/text/filename) that do not actually correspond to any schema parameter, so it neither explains the numeric limits nor the required courseId.

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?

States a specific verb ('Localiza') and resource ('sílabos') with the search dimensions (título, texto, nombre de archivo) and notes it covers REST attachments. An agent can tell it is a syllabus-finding tool, though it never contrasts itself with the other search tools among the 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?

Implies the workflow – find candidates, then use the returned IDs to verify the section – but gives no explicit when-to-use, prerequisites, or alternatives such as blackboard_search_contents. Usage must be inferred.

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