get_analytics_course

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint, openWorldHint, idempotentHint, and destructiveHint. The description adds the HTTP method (GET) and the API endpoint path, which provides additional context about the underlying operation. It also explicitly labels the tool as 'READ-ONLY · Reporting', reinforcing the annotations. No contradictions.

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 extremely concise, using only 3 short sentences. It front-loads key information (read-only, reporting, HTTP method and path) and then succinctly describes the purpose. No superfluous information or repetition.

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 the tool has only 1 parameter, no output schema, and low complexity, the description adequately covers the basic functionality. It explains the input (course id) and the output concept (analytics). However, it does not detail what specific analytics are returned, which could be helpful for an agent. The annotations and single parameter simplicity compensate somewhat.

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 schema covers 100% of parameters with a basic description ('Course Id'). The tool description does not add any additional meaning, format constraints, examples, or context beyond what the schema already provides. Baseline score applies as schema coverage is high.

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 retrieves analytics for a specific course, using the verb 'get' and specifying the resource 'analytics for a course'. The inclusion of the HTTP method and path further clarifies. Among siblings, it is distinct from other analytics tools like get_analytics_learning_activity and other course-related 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 does not provide any guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives. It does not mention any prerequisite conditions, filtering options, or scenarios where this tool is preferred over other analytics tools. The user is left to infer use cases from the tool's name alone.

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