s21_get_modules

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

There are no annotations, so the description carries the full burden for behavioral disclosure. 'Obtiene' suggests a read operation, but the description does not explicitly state non-mutating behavior, authentication needs, or important runtime traits such as the clean_content default that reduces payload size.

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 a single, focused sentence with no filler. It front-loads the verb and the main resource, and every part adds meaningful information about the tool's output.

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 names the main output content—modules, readings, and activities—but with no output schema it does not clarify the return format or how the data is structured beyond 'organized by thematic unit.' The acronym 'SAM' is also unexplained, leaving a minor but real gap for an agent planning to consume the result.

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 description coverage is 100%, so both course_id and clean_content are already documented in the input schema. The description adds high-level result context but no new parameter-specific semantics, which fits the baseline of 3.

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 uses a clear verb ('Obtiene') and identifies a concrete resource: the module structure (SAM), readings, and activities organized by thematic unit. It is specific enough to convey the tool's main function, though it does not explicitly differentiate it from siblings like s21_get_reading or s21_get_syllabus.

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?

No guidance is given about when to use this tool versus alternatives. The description merely states what it retrieves and implies that an agent should call it when module structure is needed, but it never names exclusions or sibling tools to prefer in different situations.

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