connects_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 tool's safe read-only nature is covered. The description adds scope context (Connects vs Blackboard) but does not disclose pagination, data freshness, authentication requirements, or other behavioral details. This is adequate but not rich beyond the annotations.

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 sentences with no filler. The first sentence front-loads the core action, and the second adds a valuable routing note. 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 simple read-only paginated list tool with an output schema and detailed annotations, the description covers the main scope and the key alternative context. It does not explain what 'Connects' is or when to use connects_course singular, but the core invocation needs are satisfied.

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%, and the description says nothing about limit or offset. The schema provides defaults and constraints, but the description does not compensate for the lack of parameter documentation. An agent must infer the pagination meaning entirely from the parameter names and schema bounds.

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 clearly states the action and resource: 'List Connects courses.' The second sentence explicitly separates this tool from Blackboard tools, so an agent can distinguish it from siblings like blackboard_courses. It is concise and unambiguous about what the tool does.

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 a clear exclusion: for LMS readings, assessments, and grades, use Blackboard tools. This helps an agent avoid using connects_courses for LMS-related work. It does not explicitly mention the singular connects_course sibling or provide a more detailed when-to-use comparison, but the main routing guidance is present.

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