list_lessons

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true and openWorldHint=true, so the safety profile is covered. The description adds a meaningful limitation (no lesson-taking) but says nothing about result shape, pagination, or whether missing course ids produce errors.

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 short sentences, front-loaded with the core purpose. The read-only limitation follows immediately with zero filler.

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?

An output schema exists, so return-value details are not needed in the description, and the sole parameter is fully documented. The only gap is the lack of relationship to sibling listing tools such as get_course_contents.

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 100% and the single course_ids parameter is fully documented in the schema. The description's phrase 'one or more courses' matches the schema but adds no new semantics such as ordering or error behavior.

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?

States a specific verb ('List') and resource ('Lesson activities') plus scope ('across one or more courses'), so the agent knows exactly what this returns. It doesn't explicitly contrast with nearby siblings like get_course_contents, but the resource focus is unambiguous.

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 explicitly excludes one use case ('taking a lesson is not supported'), which is useful guidance. However, it never names an alternative tool or says when to prefer this over get_course_contents or similar listing tools.

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