get_course

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries full burden. It correctly indicates a read operation ('Get') and discloses data licensing ('ODbL licensed'). However, it could be more explicit about being read-only, having no side effects, or requiring authentication, but the current level is sufficient.

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?

A single sentence that is immediately informative, front-loaded with purpose, and contains no filler. Every word earns its place.

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 one parameter and no output schema, the description adequately covers what is returned (scorecard info). It could mention that the result includes additional details like course name and location, but as stated it provides enough context for an agent.

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% with one parameter described as 'Course UUID from search results'. The description adds 'from search results' which is useful context, but does not significantly add beyond the schema. Baseline 3 is appropriate.

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 verb 'Get', the resource 'detailed golf course info', and specifics 'full scorecard with par and handicap index per hole'. It distinguishes from sibling tools like search_courses (which is for finding courses) and get_tees (which is for tee info).

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 explicitly state when to use this tool versus alternatives. The required parameter course_id implies you need a specific course UUID, but there is no guidance like 'use after search_courses' or 'use for retrieving a full course profile'.

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