module-overview-page

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries full burden. It discloses several behavioral traits: GLOBAL scope, config-driven, flexible data categories, renderer module, and slide-plan dependency. However, it does not disclose whether 'build' creates/updates a Canvas page, overwrites existing content, or requires specific permissions, leaving side effects unclear.

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 dense but each sentence adds meaningful context: purpose, flexibility, implementation details, and triggers. The implementation sentence about the renderer is slightly technical but reinforces the config-driven nature, so no fluff.

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?

A config-driven build tool with no params and an output schema, but the description still needs to explain its internal structure and dependencies. It covers the overview structure, flexible section blocks, renderer/config, slide-plan alias, and triggers. Missing explicit disclosure of side effects (create vs update) and prerequisites, so not a perfect 5.

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?

The input schema is empty (0 parameters), so baseline is 4. The description adds value beyond the schema by explaining that the tool is config-driven and uses course_config.load(<course_slug>), and by listing trigger phrases that help the agent know when and how to invoke it without explicit parameters.

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 'build a module OVERVIEW page (the representative page at the top of a Canvas module)' with a specific verb and resource. It also distinguishes from sibling tools like create_page or get_module by focusing on the overview page and providing trigger phrases like '대표 페이지'.

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?

It gives explicit triggers ('module overview page', 'make the overview/representative page for module N') and an explicit alternative/dependency: 'For per-slide breakdowns it uses the slide-plan skill.' This tells the agent when to use this tool vs slide-plan.

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