portal_materials

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure. It indicates a read operation ('Get') but does not mention return format, pagination, whether omitting courseId returns all materials, or any access considerations. This is minimal but not misleading.

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 short, direct, and front-loads the core purpose. Every sentence adds relevant information, though the overall terseness leaves some behavioral gaps.

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 tool with one optional parameter and full schema coverage, the description covers the basics. However, the lack of differentiation from sibling tools and the absence of any return-behavior details make it only minimally viable.

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% for the single optional courseId parameter, so the schema already documents it adequately. The description's phrase 'filter by course ID' adds little beyond what the schema states, hitting the baseline expectation.

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 uses a specific verb ('Get') and a clear resource ('teaching/learning materials'), and identifies the optional courseId filter. It is clear about what the tool does, though it does not explicitly distinguish itself from sibling tools like portal_library or portal_lesson_plans.

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 gives no guidance on when to choose this tool over portal_library, portal_lesson_plans, or other related siblings. It only states that courseId is optional, leaving the decision of when to use the tool entirely to the agent without context.

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