get_course

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full burden. It discloses the return payload (description and enrollment code), which is genuine behavioral information, but says nothing about failure modes (invalid/unknown id), permissions, or authentication requirements.

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 compact lines: purpose first, then the parameter note. No filler, nothing repeated from the schema's structured fields.

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 one-parameter read tool with no output schema and no annotations, the description covers the essentials: what is fetched, what comes back, and where the id originates. Only error/empty-result behavior is unaddressed, which is a minor gap at this complexity.

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 0%, so the description must compensate — and it does, documenting the single parameter's provenance ('from list_courses') and its format ('numeric string'). That is meaningful semantics the bare string-typed schema does not supply.

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?

States a specific verb+resource ('Get one course by id') and names the fields returned (description, enrollment code). It is distinguishable from the list_* siblings by being singular and by pointing at list_courses as the id source, though it never explicitly contrasts itself.

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?

Usage is implied rather than stated: the note that course_id comes from list_courses suggests the retrieve-after-list flow. There is no explicit when-to-use/when-not-to-use guidance or mention of alternative ways to reach course data.

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