getPackages

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure. It only states 'Get class packages', implying a read-only operation, but gives no details on permissions, pagination, return format, or side effects. This is minimal transparency beyond the verb 'get'.

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 extremely concise and front-loaded, consisting of a single short phrase. There is no filler, but the brevity comes at the cost of conveying useful context, making it slightly under-specified rather than optimal.

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?

With no output schema and no annotations, the description leaves the return values and behavioral details unspecified. It doesn't explain the relationship between locationId and classScheduleId or whether they are optional filters. For a tool with two optional parameters, this is insufficient context for an agent to invoke it confidently.

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 descriptions cover 100% of the parameters (locationId and classScheduleId), so the description need not repeat them. However, the description adds no additional meaning about how these parameters interact with each other or whether they act as filters, which the schema already handles minimally.

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 the verb 'Get' with the resource 'class packages', making it clear this is a read operation for a class-related resource. It somewhat distinguishes from sibling tools like getServices or getProducts by specifying 'class packages', though it doesn't define what a package is.

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 provides no guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives such as getServices, getProducts, or getClassSchedules. There are no exclusions, prerequisites, or alternative recommendations, leaving the agent to infer usage context.

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