Browse a course content tree

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true and openWorldHint=true, so the safety profile is covered. The description adds genuinely useful behavioral context: it walks recursively, returns folder paths, and can be bounded by maxDepth/maxNodes. It does not mention pagination or what happens when maxNodes is exceeded, but the openWorldHint and readOnlyHint cover the main risk.

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?

Three sentences, each earning its place: what it does, why it matters, and how to bound it. The most important information is front-loaded.

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 recursive traversal with a fully documented schema, the description is nearly complete. It could mention what happens when maxNodes is hit or whether the result is a flat list vs. nested tree, but the phrase 'returns every item with its folder path' implies a flat list, and the annotations cover the safety profile.

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 the schema already documents all six parameters. The description adds the recursive-walk semantics and the bounding intent, but it does not add meaning beyond the schema for individual parameters. Baseline 3 is appropriate.

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 ('Walks'), a precise resource ('full content outline of a course recursively'), and the return payload ('every item with its folder path, type, and any attached file'). It also positions itself as 'the primary way to discover what material a course contains,' which distinguishes it from sibling tools like bb_list_content and bb_get_content.

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 says this is the primary discovery tool and gives bounding guidance ('Use maxDepth/maxNodes to bound very large courses'). It does not explicitly name alternatives or state when not to use it, but the primary-tool framing plus sibling names gives an agent enough context to select it.

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