List Course Plans

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

With no annotations, the description carries the transparency burden. It discloses that the endpoint is public ('No login required') and scoped to published plans, which is useful. It does not address behavior such as whether plan_type_id affects filtering or any error/rate-limit behavior, but the read-only nature is obvious from 'List'.

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 sentence that front-loads the core action and result, with the access note appended. No filler or redundancy.

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?

For a two-parameter public list tool with an output schema, the description covers the main purpose and access requirement. However, it leaves `plan_type_id` unexplained and does not specify how `program` should be passed (name/code), so an agent may need to infer valid input. The gaps are modest given low complexity.

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 connects the `program` parameter to 'programme' and gives no detail about the program identifier format or what `plan_type_id` means or what valid values are. Thus it adds little beyond the schema's titles and default.

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 a specific verb ('List') and a specific resource ('course plans published for a programme') and states the returned identifier ('plan ids'). This distinguishes it from siblings like list_courses or obs_public_list_branches, and the 'No login required' note separates it from authenticated OBS tools.

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 gives no explicit when-to-use guidance or alternatives. It implies a use case (someone needs published course plan IDs for a programme) and notes no login is required, but it does not explain how to choose this over sibling list tools or when not to use it.

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