Rate Course Sections by Instructor

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full burden. It discloses 'No login required' and 'public OBS schedule', which are key behavioral traits. It implies a read-only operation. It does not mention rate limits, errors, or term dependence, but these are less critical for a public query tool. The disclosure of auth requirements is valuable.

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 dense sentence that front-loads the core purpose and includes the key output fields and the no-login note. It is efficient but could be split for readability; still, it is not verbose and every clause adds information.

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?

The tool has 5 parameters with 0% schema coverage, and the description explains none of them except implicitly 'codes'. An agent would not know how to set 'level', 'comment_limit', 'only_available', or 'include_comments'. While an output schema exists, the input semantics are critically under-explained for a tool with this many parameters.

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 the description must compensate. It only implicitly explains 'codes' (given course codes). It does not explain 'level', 'comment_limit', 'only_available', or 'include_comments' at all. The description adds minimal meaning beyond the parameter names, leaving the agent to guess what these parameters control.

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 states a specific verb+resource: it lists sections with schedule details and instructor hocametre ratings for given course codes. It clearly differentiates from siblings like obs_public_get_schedule (schedule only) and hocametre_get_instructor (single instructor) by combining both data sources.

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 provides a clear context: use this to compare sections of the same course by instructor ratings. It does not explicitly mention alternatives or exclusions, but the purpose is sufficiently distinct that an agent can infer when to use it. Lacks explicit when-not guidance, but the context is clear.

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