List Courses

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

No annotations are provided, leaving the description as the sole source. It states the tool returns course names and IDs, which is basic behavioral info, but does not disclose authentication, rate limits, or any other side effects. The behavior is straightforward but not exhaustive.

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 sentences with no redundant words. Essential information is front-loaded: the action, the platform, the output, and its usage. Every sentence 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?

Given no output schema, the description sufficiently explains the return values and their purpose. Sibling tools (e.g., get_announcements) require a courseId, so this tool's role as a prerequisite is clear. The description is complete for a parameterless list tool.

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 tool has no parameters, so schema coverage is 100%. Baseline for 0 params is 4. The description adds value by explaining the output format and how it integrates with other tools, exceeding the baseline.

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 explicitly states it lists courses the user is enrolled in on Waterloo LEARN, specifies the output (course names and ou IDs), explains their use by other tools, and gives a canonical query. This clearly distinguishes it from sibling tools that operate on individual courses.

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 includes a direct use case ('What courses am I taking?') and explains that the returned IDs are used as courseId by other tools, implying this tool should be called first. However, it does not explicitly mention when not to use it or alternatives.

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