create_course_section

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

Beyond the annotations, it discloses non-idempotency and duplicate-effect risk, server-side auth injection, throttling under LearnWorlds' 30-per-10s cap with retry on 429/5xx, and exact non-2xx error mappings. This is substantial added behavioral context and is consistent with the annotations.

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 organized into labeled sections — Behavior, Parameters, Returns, Use when — and front-loads the write indicator and endpoint. No sentence is filler; the length is justified by the auth, retry, and error details.

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?

Given no output schema, it describes the response format and error surfaces clearly. The only notable gap is that the body payload structure for a course section is not described, which would help an agent construct or validate the payload when the user does not supply one.

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?

Though schema coverage is 100%, the description adds meaningful nuance: 'body' is expected even though the spec leaves it optional, and the entire JSON payload should be forwarded verbatim in that single argument. This compensates for the schema's deliberately hidden body reference.

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 opens with a clear verb and resource — 'Creates a new course section in the course, specified by the course id' — and reinforces it with the endpoint path. This is unambiguous against sibling tools like create_course because the target resource is specifically a course section, not a course.

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 an explicit usage rule: 'Use when: only when the user asked to create this,' and advises checking with a read tool that the course exists and the section is not already present. It names related Courses tools but could more strongly contrast with update_course or create_course for non-create intents.

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