search_courses

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

No annotations provided, so description carries the burden. It states returns 'compact course rows', implying read-only operation, but lacks details on pagination, rate limits, or side effects. Adequate but not rich.

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 efficiently states core functionality with key parameter examples. Second sentence adds clear usage advice. Every word earns its place.

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?

Despite 5 params, no output schema, no annotations, the description covers the main purpose, key parameters, and usage context. Missing details on 'limit' and return structure, but for a search tool it is reasonably 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?

Schema coverage is 0%, but description adds meaning for 'query' (free text), 'subject' (with example '198' for CS), 'level' (explains 300=300-level), and 'term' (mentioned). However, 'limit' parameter is not described, and no format for 'term' is given. Partial compensation.

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 verb 'search' and the resource 'Rutgers course catalog', listing search criteria (free text, subject, level, term). It also distinguishes from sibling 'get_course' by specifying when to use this tool.

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?

Explicitly says 'Use before get_course when the user names a topic not a code', providing clear context for when to use this tool vs an alternative. No explicit when-not scenarios, but the guidance is direct and helpful.

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