Get Course Details

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

No annotations are supplied, so the description carries the full behavioral burden. It discloses the substantial payload returned (syllabus, assessment rules, timetable, literature), which tells the agent this is a heavy read, but never states that it is read-only, whether authentication is required, or what happens for an unknown course code.

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 with the resource stated first and the field list after, no filler or repetition. The enumeration is long but every item conveys real payload information rather than restating the name.

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?

The output schema exists, so return values need not be explained, and the one-sentence body is adequate for a simple lookup. However, with no annotations at all, gaps remain around side effects, auth, and the consequence of omitting faculty/semester, which for a three-parameter course lookup matters.

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 100%, so all three parameters, their formats and examples are already documented in the schema; baseline 3 applies. The description adds nothing about the parameters themselves, notably it never clarifies how the optional faculty and semester narrow or disambiguate the lookup.

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 a specific verb ('Get') plus resource ('full course details') and enumerates exactly what is returned: syllabus, objectives, instructors, assessment rules, timetable, literature. That enumeration alone separates it from catalogue-browsing or enrolled-course siblings, though it never names an alternative explicitly.

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?

There is no when-to-use guidance and no mention of alternatives such as browse_course_catalogue (discovery) or get_interactive_syllabus / get_enrolled_courses, which a reader could easily confuse with this lookup. The agent must infer that this is the single-course detail call from the description of returned fields alone.

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