Get Blackboard course details

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true, so the description need not repeat safety. It adds value by specifying the exact fields returned (name, code, term, availability window, Ultra/Classic mode, tools), which clarifies the scope of the read operation. No contradiction with 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?

A single, front-loaded sentence that lists all key return fields with no filler. Every word contributes to understanding the tool's output.

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 retrieval tool, the description covers the essential return data and the tool's purpose. It doesn't address error handling or pagination, but given the annotations and the simplicity of the operation, it is sufficiently complete for an agent to call it correctly.

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 both courseId and includeTools are fully documented in the schema. The description mentions 'tools enabled' which aligns with includeTools but adds no additional meaning beyond the schema. 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?

The description clearly states the action (get) and resource (one course) and enumerates the fields returned (name, code, term, availability window, mode, tools). This distinguishes it from list operations like bb_list_courses, though it doesn't name a specific alternative. It is specific enough for an agent to know what this tool returns.

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 implies usage (retrieve full detail for a single course) but provides no explicit guidance on when to choose this over bb_browse_course or other getters. It does not mention alternatives or exclusions, so the agent must infer from the name and context.

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