list_courses

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true, destructiveHint=false and openWorldHint=true, so the safety profile is covered externally. The description adds only the shape of the results (ID, name, link), with no mention of volume, pagination, or whether all enrollments are included.

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?

A single front-loaded sentence that states the scope and the returned fields with no filler. Appropriate sizing for a zero-argument listing tool.

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?

With no inputs, an output schema present, and annotations covering the safety profile, almost nothing else is required. Minor residual gaps: it restates return fields the output schema already provides, and says nothing about result volume or pagination.

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 takes zero parameters, so there is no parameter semantics to explain; the baseline of 4 applies. Nothing in the description conflicts with the empty schema.

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?

Names a specific verb and resource ('Lista todos los cursos matriculados del usuario') and even enumerates the fields returned (ID, nombre, enlace). It is clearly distinguishable from the content-oriented siblings (get_course_contents, read_content, search_course_contents) by implication, though it never explicitly says so.

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 scope phrase 'cursos matriculados del usuario' implies when the tool applies (discovering the user's courses before drilling into contents), but there is no explicit when-to-use, when-not-to-use, or named alternative such as get_course_contents.

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