Full Course History

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure. It implies a read operation via 'Return' but does not explicitly state read-only status, authentication requirements, rate limits, or any side effects. It also does not clarify what happens when include_empty is toggled, which is a behavioral nuance.

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, tightly written sentence that front-loads the core action and outcome. There is zero fluff or redundancy, making it highly efficient.

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?

While the description covers the main return content, it omits explanation of the include_empty parameter and does not differentiate from sibling tools. Given the tool's simplicity and the presence of an output schema, the description is still insufficient because the parameter is undocumented and usage context is absent.

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%, and the description does not mention the only parameter, include_empty. The agent has no clue what this boolean does or when to set it true or false. The description fails to compensate for the schema's lack of explanation, leaving the parameter entirely mysterious.

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 'Return' with a clear resource: 'every graded course across every semester, plus pass/fail counts and the list of failed courses.' It is unambiguous about the scope and contents. However, it does not explicitly differentiate from close siblings like obs_get_transcript or obs_get_grades, so it stops short of a 5.

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 such as obs_get_grades or obs_get_transcript. There is no mention of context, exclusions, or prerequisites, leaving the agent to infer usage purely from the name and content.

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