Get Enrolled Courses

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full burden. 'Retrieve' implies a read-only operation, and the embedded /auth/ URL usefully signals that an authenticated IS session is required — real information beyond the name. It stops short of stating what happens when unauthenticated (relevant given the set_session_cookies and check_auth_status siblings) or any pagination/result-size behavior.

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 no filler; the core action leads. The appended URL is compact and carries the auth-signal payload rather than being redundant padding, though it is marginally less useful than a plain statement of the authentication prerequisite.

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?

An output schema exists, so return shape need not be described, and the lone parameter is fully documented. What remains missing is the prerequisite chain — whether the agent must have a session established first — and any disambiguation from the catalogue/course-detail siblings, which matters in a toolset this crowded.

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%: the single optional 'semester' parameter is fully documented in the schema with examples ('jaro2026', 'podzim2026') and default behavior. The description adds nothing beyond that, so the baseline of 3 applies.

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 and resource: 'Retrieve all enrolled courses for the student', which tells an agent exactly what data comes back. It does not, however, distinguish itself from siblings like get_course_details or browse_course_catalogue, so an agent must infer that this is the enrollment-scoped list rather than a catalogue search or per-course detail lookup.

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 gives no when-to-use guidance, no exclusions, and never names an alternative among the ~20 sibling tools. The only implicit signal is 'for the student', suggesting current-user scope, but nothing tells the agent when to prefer this over browse_course_catalogue or get_course_details.

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