수강 강좌 목록

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint and idempotentHint, so no additional safety context is needed. The description usefully specifies the returned fields (ID, name, progress, URL), which helps set expectations for a read-only list operation.

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 two concise sentences, with the main purpose stated first and the optional behavior explained second. There is no redundancy or unnecessary detail.

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 description mentions the output fields (ID, name, progress, URL), which is essential given the lack of an output schema. It does not cover potential edge cases like pagination or errors, but for a simple list tool this is adequate.

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 single parameter include_all is fully described in the schema (100% coverage) and also explained in the main description. Its boolean meaning and default behavior are clear, requiring no extra inference.

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 clearly states the tool lists enrolled courses with ID, name, progress, and URL, and explains the include_all option for completed courses. It is distinct from siblings like get_course_overview, but does not explicitly name them as alternatives.

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 explains the include_all parameter but gives no guidance on when to use this tool over sibling tools such as get_course_overview or open_lms_source. Users are left to infer the appropriate context from the tool name.

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