get_analytics_course

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

Beyond annotations, the description reveals server-side auth injection, LearnWorlds' 30-per-10s throttle with retries on 429/5xx, non-2xx error behavior, and specific status meanings (401/403/404/422). This is substantial operational disclosure, and it aligns with 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 labeled sections (Behavior, Returns, Use when) make the content scannable, and almost every sentence adds useful info. Minor redundancy exists between 'Get analytics for a course' and 'Returns analytics about the course specified by the provided course id.'

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 one-parameter read-only lookup, the description is highly complete: it covers auth, throttling, retries, error semantics, and a use-case statement. With no output schema, the response body content is left generic ('LearnWorlds JSON response body'), but this is a minor gap for invocation purposes.

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 required parameter id is fully described in the schema ('Course Id'), and schema coverage is 100%. The description only repeats 'provided course id' without adding format, validation, or usage detail, so it adds no real value beyond the schema.

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 identifies a specific resource and operation: 'Get analytics for a course' via GET /v2/courses/{id}/analytics. It names related reporting tools but does not explicitly explain how this differs from get_analytics_learning_activity or the progress tools, so sibling differentiation is only partial.

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?

'Use when: safe to call speculatively for lookups and reporting' provides clear context, and 'Not for changing anything — use the matching 🟡 write tool' gives an explicit exclusion. However, it only lists related reporting tools without specifying which scenario should select them instead of this one.

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