List Courses

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint, idempotentHint, openWorldHint and destructiveHint=false, so the safety profile is covered. The description adds nothing beyond that — no pagination behavior (default 20 per page lives only in the schema), no rate limits, and the claim of returning "all" courses sits awkwardly against the available filters.

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?

A single front-loaded sentence with no filler or repetition of the title. It is efficient, though its brevity comes at the cost of the missing scope/filter qualification.

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 seven-parameter list tool with pagination and multiple filters, no output schema, and no annotation detail on result shape, the description should at least signal filtering and paging behavior. Instead it implies an unfiltered dump, leaving the agent to discover scope from the schema alone.

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 seven parameters are fully documented in the schema itself, which sets the baseline at 3. The description adds no format, default, or interaction detail beyond the schema, and "all" slightly undercuts the filtering story.

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?

State a clear verb+resource ("Fetch ... courses") scoped to "your school," so an agent can tell it apart from get_course (singular read). However, "all courses" is inaccurate given the schema supports name, is_published, author_bio_id and created_at filtering, so the stated scope overpromises.

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?

No when-to-use guidance and no mention of any alternative such as get_course for a single course. The agent is left to infer that this is the browse-everything entry point versus the single-item read.

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