find_courses_by_attribute

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

No annotations provided, so the description carries full burden. It describes two matching modes and prefilter behavior, but omits details on authentication, rate limits, or the return format beyond the output schema.

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?

The description is very concise—three lines of text with no fluff. It front-loads the purpose and provides essential details for key parameters in a structured format.

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?

Given 5 parameters and 0% schema coverage, the description only fully explains 2 (match, prefilter_query). 'attribute' is exemplified but not completely described; 'limit' and 'semester' are omitted. The output schema exists, so return values are covered, but the description could be more complete.

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?

With 0% schema description coverage, the description adds meaning for 'match' and 'prefilter_query', explaining their exact behaviors. 'attribute' is exemplified but not formally defined; 'limit' and 'semester' are not explained.

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 tool finds courses by a given attribute with examples like 'EUMS' or 'MFR'. It distinguishes from siblings like search_courses (likely by keyword) and find_courses_by_requirement, though not 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?

It explains when to use match='code' vs match='description' and suggests using prefilter_query for faster results. However, it does not provide guidance on when not to use this tool or how it compares to alternatives.

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