List Course Assignments

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

With no annotations, the description must disclose behavioral traits. It does state 'read-only and never submits work,' which is a critical safety property. However, it doesn't mention any other behaviors like pagination, return format, or potential access requirements. For a simple read operation, this is adequate but not rich.

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?

Two concise sentences with no redundancy. The purpose is front-loaded, and the safety note is immediately relevant. Every word earns its place.

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?

The tool has no output schema, so the description should explain what the agent can expect from the return value. It only says 'list assignments' without indicating the structure, fields, or whether assignments are ordered. Given the complexity of Canvas assignments (due dates, submission info), this is a significant gap. Additionally, it doesn't clarify whether it returns all assignments regardless of state (e.g., unpublished).

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%, so the schema fully documents the single parameter course_id. The description adds no additional meaning to the parameter, such as format validation or how to obtain it. Baseline is 3 because the schema covers it, but the description doesn't enhance 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 clearly states the verb and resource: 'List assignments in one Canvas course.' It is specific about the scope (one course) and distinguishes from course-wide operations like list_courses or get_course, though it doesn't explicitly differentiate from other course-scoped listers like list_course_files or list_course_modules.

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?

There is no guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives. It doesn't mention prerequisites, such as needing a valid course_id, nor does it contrast with related tools like list_my_submissions or get_course_bundle. The only context is the read-only note, which is behavioral rather than usage direction.

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