创建课程

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

Annotations already indicate a write operation (readOnlyHint=false, destructiveHint=false). The description adds valuable behavioral context: it states the return value (course ID), explains the idempotency protection via courseUniqueIdentity, and clarifies parameter effects like mainTeacherUid's management role. No contradictions with 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?

The description is well-structured with a brief intro, a bullet-style parameter list, and a return statement. It is appropriately sized for 11 parameters, and every part is relevant, though the parameter list partially duplicates schema descriptions.

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?

Given the tool's complexity (11 parameters, 1 required) and lack of an output schema, the description covers the return value, parameter semantics, and the conceptual role of a course. It doesn't mention authorization needs or error cases, but the provided info is sufficient for an agent to make a successful call.

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?

While the schema already provides full parameter coverage (100%), the description adds semantic value by explaining subjectId categories (0:空, 1:语文, 2:数学...) and clarifying expiryTime's default behavior. This goes beyond the schema's terse descriptions and aids correct parameter selection.

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 '创建ClassIn课程' (create a ClassIn course) and defines a course as a container for class sessions, which distinguishes it from sibling tools like adding students to courses or editing courses. The verb and resource are specific and unambiguous.

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 implies usage (to create a course) but does not explicitly specify when to use this tool versus alternatives like classin_edit_course or classin_end_course. There are no explicit exclusions or prerequisites, so it provides clear context without direct alternative comparisons.

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