classroom_search_courses

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

The annotations cover read-only behavior, but the description adds essential behavioral detail: it is a client-side filter, case-insensitive, returns exactly one page with the shape {items, nextPageToken}, and requires the caller to continue until nextPageToken is null. This goes well beyond the structured 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?

Two short sentences deliver the essential search behavior and pagination contract with no filler. The most important behavioral details are 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?

For a paginated read-only search with no output schema, the description provides the return shape and termination condition, which is enough for basic correct invocation. The main gap is the undocumented fullData parameter, but the schema's default and the overall simplicity keep this from being severely incomplete.

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 only 25%, with fullData, pageSize, and pageToken lacking schema descriptions. The description explains query meaning and implies pageToken usage through the return contract, but fullData remains completely unexplained and pageSize semantics are only inferred.

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 'Search' and the resource 'courses', and adds that search is by name or section, case-insensitive, and client-side. This distinguishes it from classroom_list_courses and classroom_get_course, though it does not explicitly name a sibling alternative.

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 implies this tool is for filtered, case-insensitive searches on course name or section rather than for listing or retrieving a specific course. However, it never explicitly states when to prefer this over classroom_list_courses or provides any exclusion criteria.

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