blackboard_courses

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint, openWorldHint, idempotentHint, and destructiveHint, covering the safety profile. The description adds helpful scope context ('enrolled courses or organizations') but does not disclose additional behavioral details such as pagination or filtering effects beyond what the schema already exposes.

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?

Two short sentences with no filler. The first sentence front-loads the verb and resource, and the second sentence adds high-value workflow guidance about IDs. Every word earns its place.

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 tool with six parameters and 0% schema coverage, the description is too sparse. It correctly identifies the tool's role and mentions organizations, but it omits necessary context about filter semantics, pagination, and the available_only default, leaving an agent to guess or infer parameter behavior.

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 0%, so the description must compensate, but it only hints at 'courses or organizations' and 'list/search.' It does not explain the difference between term and query, the meaning of available_only, or how limit/offset behave, leaving six parameters effectively undocumented.

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 action ('List/search') on a clear resource ('enrolled courses or organizations') and adds that the returned IDs are preferred for other Blackboard tools. This differentiates it from singular tools like blackboard_course and establishes it as the entry-point listing tool.

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?

'Returned IDs are preferred for all other Blackboard tools' gives an explicit reason to call this tool first before using other Blackboard tools. It does not name specific alternative tools or explicitly say when not to use it, but the workflow guidance is clear enough.

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