Get Courses

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

With no annotations, the description must disclose behavior. It correctly implies a read-only operation ('Return all courses'), but does not mention caching, authentication requirements, or potential performance impacts. However, the tool has no parameters and an output schema, so the description is minimally adequate.

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 a single, clear sentence with no extraneous information. Every word contributes to understanding the tool's purpose.

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 no annotations but an output schema, the description is sufficient for a simple list operation. However, it lacks context about the source (live vs cached), scope ('visible' may need clarification), and does not differentiate from sibling tools that might also list courses.

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 tool has zero parameters, and schema description coverage is 100%. The description adds no parameter information because none is needed. Per guidelines, 0 parameters warrants a baseline of 4.

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 uses the specific verb 'Return' and defines the resource as 'all courses visible in the Ninova dashboard', which clearly identifies the tool's function and distinguishes it from sibling tools like 'list_courses' or 'get_dashboard'.

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 provides no guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives. Given the presence of many sibling tools (e.g., 'list_courses', 'get_dashboard'), the agent lacks context to make an informed choice.

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