get_courseFetch a specific course by its unique ID to retrieve course details for a Teachable school profile.
Fetch a specific course by ID.
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| account | No | Exact private school profile label; not a provider identity or authorization proof. | |
| course_id | Yes | Return a course by its unique ID. |
Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.
v2.0.0Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
The annotations already declare readOnlyHint, idempotentHint, destructiveHint=false, and openWorldHint, so the safety profile is covered. The description adds no behavioral context beyond that, such as authentication needs, rate limits, or error/return behavior.
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?
It is a single, front-loaded sentence with no wasted words. The action and key identifier are clear immediately.
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 simple read-only getter with full schema coverage and strong annotations, this is minimally viable. However, it omits the account parameter behavior and does not describe the return value, which matters somewhat because there is no output schema.
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%, so the schema already documents both course_id and account. The description only reinforces that the course is fetched by ID and adds no syntax, format, or optional-parameter guidance beyond the 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 states a specific verb and resource: fetch a specific course by ID. It distinguishes the tool from list-oriented siblings like list_courses by requiring an ID, but it does not name any sibling alternative explicitly.
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 only says what the tool does and implies usage when a course ID is known. It provides no when-to-use guidance, no alternatives such as list_courses or get_course_progress, and no exclusions.
Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.