get_course_ratings

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

The description discloses that the data is public and always available, and lists the four included fields. However, it does not describe error behavior, response structure, or any limitations. With no annotations provided, this is adequate but not thorough.

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 concise, with two sentences that efficiently communicate the purpose and included data. No extraneous information is present, and the most important fact ('always available') 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?

Given the presence of an output schema and two parameters, the description covers the basic purpose and output fields but lacks parameter explanations and usage guidance relative to many sibling tools. It is adequate but incomplete for agent decision-making.

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?

The description does not explain the input parameters (course_code and semester). With schema description coverage at 0%, the description fails to add any meaning beyond the schema, leaving the agent uninformed about required inputs.

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 returns public aggregate ratings for a course and lists the specific fields included. It emphasizes that it's always available, distinguishing it from tools that might require authentication or have limited availability.

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 implicitly indicates usage for obtaining course ratings but does not explicitly state when to use this tool over siblings like get_course_details or get_course_reviews. No exclusions or context are provided.

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