get_geneds

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

Despite no annotations, the description discloses that the tool returns a list of Gened objects with course info, tags, and a start/stop window. This covers the behavioral aspects of a read-only list operation adequately.

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 concise with a clear header, then structured Args and Returns sections. Every sentence adds value, and it is front-loaded with the core purpose.

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 the tool has one required parameter and an output schema (implied by 'Returns: List of Gened objects'), the description covers purpose, usage, parameter details, and return format completely. No gaps remain.

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 schema has 0% description coverage, but the description's Args section adds significant meaning by listing valid school values ('SCS', 'CIT', 'MCS', 'Dietrich') and mapping them to their full names, far exceeding the bare schema.

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 'List gen-ed-eligible courses for a CMU school,' specifying the verb 'list' and the resource 'gen-ed-eligible courses.' This distinguishes it from sibling tools like search_courses that might list courses in general.

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 explicitly says 'Use this when the user wants courses satisfying a gen-ed requirement for their college,' providing clear when-to-use guidance. It does not explicitly mention when not to use or alternative tools, but the context is sufficient.

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