find_courses_by_requirement

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

Discloses substring-matching behavior, which is the core algorithmic detail. However, no annotations exist, and the description does not explicitly state that the tool is read-only or safe, nor mention any side effects or rate limits. The matching behavior is useful but safety is assumed.

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?

Two sentences, no filler. First sentence states the main purpose; second adds key detail about substring matching. Efficient and 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 search tool with 3 parameters and no annotations, the description adequately covers the main query but omits details on output (though output schema exists) and parameter semantics for limit/semester. Usage context is missing. Adequate but incomplete.

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 0%, so description must compensate. It explains the 'requirement' parameter (pre-NGSS code/name) and substring matching. But 'limit' and 'semester' parameters are not described, leaving their purpose unclear. Partial coverage.

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?

Description clearly states the tool finds courses fulfilling a requirement using pre-NGSS code or name, and specifies substring matching. While it doesn't explicitly distinguish from siblings like 'find_courses_by_attribute' or 'search_courses', the specific mention of requirements differentiates it adequately.

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?

No guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives. Does not mention scenarios or limitations (e.g., for general course search, use 'search_courses'). The description is purely operational.

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