list_module_items

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure. It only mentions that results are ordered, but does not state whether the operation is read-only, how pagination works, what the response structure looks like, or any other behavioral traits.

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?

The description is extremely concise with a single short sentence, which is appropriate for a simple tool. However, it lacks structure and additional detail that could help the agent, making it somewhat under-specified rather than effectively concise.

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?

Given no annotations, no parameter descriptions, and a brief purpose, the description is incomplete for proper tool selection and invocation. Even though an output schema exists, the lack of input guidance and behavioral context leaves significant gaps for a tool that requires two parameters.

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 0%, and the description provides no explanation of the parameters 'course' or 'module_id'. The schema only lists types and titles, so the agent has no clue what values to provide or how they relate to the module listing.

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 'What is inside a module, in order' clearly indicates that the tool lists the items within a module, and the 'in order' phrase adds specificity about ordering. It distinguishes itself from sibling tools like list_modules or get_module by focusing on the contents, though it could be more explicit about listing items.

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 provided on when to use this tool versus alternatives. The description does not mention any context, prerequisites, or exclusions, leaving the agent to infer usage from the name alone.

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