ghl_course_list_enrollments

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

Annotations already cover the read-only/idempotent safety profile, and the description adds real value beyond them: the underlying source table (user_purchases), the fields NOT returned (email, lesson progress), the opaque nature of the cursor encoding createdAt and id, and the required v3 Version header.

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?

Purpose is front-loaded in the first lines, followed by scope, return limitations, and endpoint/metadata. Slightly listy with redundant auth/version restatement (v3 stated twice), but nothing is truly wasted.

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?

With no output schema, the description appropriately discloses what is returned and what is excluded (no email, no lesson progress) and how to page through all results. Auth and version requirements are covered, leaving little an agent would need that isn't stated.

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 coverage is 100%, so the baseline is 3, but the description adds meaning beyond it — clarifying productId is a course/product id rather than a generic product, and explaining that cursor encodes createdAt and id. limit/cursor get only the generic pagination framing.

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?

States a specific verb and resource — 'List contacts enrolled in a product' — plus the concrete path semantics of productId as the course/product id. It also implicitly separates itself from completions/progress siblings by noting it 'Does not return email or lesson progress', though it never names those siblings directly.

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?

Provides prerequisites (Location/Sub-Account token, courses.readonly scope) and points at pagination for full result sets, but gives no explicit when-to-use vs when-not guidance and no named alternative among the many ghl_course_* siblings.

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