edubase_get_user_classes

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true, idempotentHint=true, and destructiveHint=false, so the safety profile is fully covered. The description adds the membership-relationship semantic (classes the user belongs to, not owns or administers), but discloses nothing about pagination, empty results, or whether archived/inactive classes are included. No contradiction 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?

A single front-loaded sentence with zero filler: 'List all classes a user is member of.' Every word earns its place, and the size is appropriate for a simple lookup tool.

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 one-parameter read-only tool with full annotations and an existing output schema, the description covers the essential query semantics. Minor gaps like return-behavior edge cases and empty-result handling are not critical given the output schema and annotations carry much of the burden.

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 100%; the single required 'user' parameter is already documented in the schema as 'user identification string'. The description adds no further parameter semantics such as identifier format or accepted value types, so the baseline score of 3 for full schema coverage applies.

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 uses a specific verb ('List') and names both the resource and scope ('classes a user is member of'), making the query direction clear as a membership lookup. However, it does not explicitly differentiate itself from closely related siblings like edubase_get_user_group, edubase_get_user_organizations, or edubase_get_class_members, so it stops just short of full clarity.

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?

No guidance is given on when to use this tool versus alternatives such as edubase_post_user_classes, edubase_delete_user_classes, edubase_get_class_members, or edubase_get_user_group. With dozens of related sibling tools present, the agent is left to infer the appropriate selection context on its own.

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