canvas_enrollments

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

Annotations already declare read-only, idempotent, and non-destructive behavior, so the bar is lower. The description adds useful context beyond annotations: sections of one course are merged, hidden grades remain hidden, and missing totals are noted via grades_note.

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 tightly written sentences with no wasted words. The main purpose is front-loaded, followed by precise behavioral caveats about merged sections, hidden grades, and grades_note.

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 read-only tool with two optional, fully documented parameters and no output schema, the description provides enough scope and behavioral detail to call it correctly. It could be slightly more explicit about pagination behavior, but the page parameter is already documented in the schema.

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 already documents both the raw and page parameters. The description adds no syntax or meaning for those parameters, which matches the baseline of 3 when the schema carries the parameter documentation.

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 and resource: 'Read your own enrollments and released course grades'. It also clarifies 'one entry per course' with section merging, which distinguishes it from a general course-list tool. However, it does not explicitly name or contrast with a sibling such as canvas_courses.

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 phrase 'your own enrollments and released course grades' implies when to use the tool, but there is no explicit guidance on when to choose it over canvas_courses or other grade-related siblings. No exclusions or alternative tools are mentioned.

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