课程添加老师

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

Annotations already cover the safety profile (readOnlyHint=false, destructiveHint=false, idempotentHint=true). The description adds the prerequisite that the teacher must already be an institution teacher, which is useful, but it does not disclose side effects, error behavior, or failure modes beyond that.

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 a single action sentence followed by a compact parameter list and a return note. There is no fluff, and the core purpose is front-loaded.

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 write operation with three well-described parameters and no output schema, the description covers the core purpose, prerequisite, and a generic return message. It could specify the return format in more detail, but it remains sufficient for the task's simplicity.

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 input schema provides full descriptions for all parameters (100% coverage). The description repeats the parameter names and adds minimal extra context for teacherUid ('需要先添加为机构老师'), so it contributes little beyond what the schema already offers.

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 explicitly states '向课程中添加老师' (Add teacher to course), which clearly identifies the verb 'add' and the resource 'course teacher'. This differentiates it from siblings like classin_remove_course_teacher and classin_add_teacher.

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 a clear prerequisite: '需要先添加为机构老师' (teacher must first be added as an institution teacher), implying usage after classin_add_teacher. It gives context for when to use the tool, though it does not explicitly name alternatives or exclusions.

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