get_courses

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

The description goes well beyond the readOnlyHint/idempotentHint annotations by disclosing server-side auth injection, throttling under LearnWorlds' rate cap, retry behavior on 429/5xx, sorted results, and a 50-per-page limit. It also explains how non-2xx responses surface as tool 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?

Although longer than minimal, the description is cleanly sectioned into behavior, parameters, returns, and usage. Every sentence adds operational value, and the most important read-only scoping is front-loaded.

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?

With no output schema, the description compensates by explaining the return format, HTTP status behavior, error payload mapping, and pagination. Combined with the annotations and fully documented parameters, an agent has enough context to invoke this tool correctly.

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%, so the baseline is 3, and the schema already documents page, access, and categories. The description adds practical pagination guidance—'walk them with page'—which clarifies how the page parameter should be used iteratively.

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 'Get all courses' and clearly specifies the verb, resource, and scope: a read-only GET /v2/courses returning all courses of the school. It also clarifies pagination and ordering, distinguishing this bulk-list operation from the single-record get_course sibling.

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?

Explicit 'Use when' guidance is provided: safe to call for lookups and reporting, not for mutations, with a pointer to the matching write tool. It also names related Courses tools and identifies the non-2xx error cases, giving an agent clear situational context.

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