Create Topic (Teacher)

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

Beyond the annotations, the description discloses an important precondition (teacher rights) and a failure mode (permission error for students). It also states that the call returns the new topic's id and name. This adds useful behavioral context beyond readOnlyHint=false.

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 compact and well organized: purpose, permission note, args, and return value. Each sentence earns its place, and there is no redundant filler.

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 two-parameter create operation, the description covers the essential context: required permissions, failure mode, and return shape. Since there is no output schema, providing the return value is important and is handled correctly.

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 parameter section restates the schema's types and constraints: course_id as string and name as string with 1-100 chars. Since schema coverage is only 50% and course_id has no description in the schema, the description adds marginal value by listing it, but it does not explain what course_id refers to or how to obtain it.

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 opens with a specific verb and resource: 'Create a new topic in a course.' It names the target (topic), the scope (course), and the role (teacher), clearly separating it from sibling tools like classroom_create_announcement or classroom_list_topics.

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?

It gives clear context by stating that teacher rights are required and that student accounts will receive a permission error. It does not explicitly name alternatives or say 'use this instead of X,' but the resource-specific language makes the intended use obvious.

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