canvas_assignments

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

Annotations already declare readOnly, idempotent, non-destructive, closed-world, so the safety profile is covered. The description adds genuinely useful behavior beyond that: descriptions are truncated in list results, submission status is included per item, and results are paginated. It does not explain what changes when raw JSON is requested, but that is documented in the schema.

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?

Three short sentences, front-loaded with what is returned, followed by the truncation caveat and the pagination note. No filler and every sentence carries information the agent needs.

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 usefully names the returned fields, the truncation behavior, and pagination. It leaves ordering, filtering behavior (all enrollments vs. active only), and result volume unspecified, which is a modest gap for a listing tool of this size.

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 course_id, page, and raw are all documented in the schema itself. The description's mention of pagination loosely signals the page parameter's role but adds no format or semantics beyond the schema, so the baseline 3 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?

States a specific verb and resource ("List course assignments") plus the returned data shape (dates and your submission status), and explicitly contrasts with the sibling canvas_assignment, which carries full descriptions. An agent can pick between the list and single-assignment tool without opening either schema.

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?

Gives a clear routing rule: use this for the list view, switch to canvas_assignment when the full (untruncated) description is needed. It stops short of stating exclusions such as filtering by course vs. all courses or whether upcoming-only listings belong to canvas_upcoming_events.

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