moodle_get_announcements

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true, idempotentHint=true, and openWorldHint=true, covering safety and idempotency. The description adds behavioral specifics: announcements are sorted newest first, and the most recent ones include message text. It also clarifies the 'since' parameter accepts ISO dates or relative formats. This adds value beyond the annotations without contradicting them.

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 efficient and front-loaded with the core purpose. The Args section is logically structured and each parameter is explained in a single line. While slightly verbose with the example format, it avoids redundancy and is not overly long. The content 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?

Given that an output schema exists (as indicated) and annotations cover safety, the description covers the essential aspects: what the tool returns (announcements with message text), ordering, and parameter semantics. It does not mention error handling or edge cases, but for a read-only retrieval tool this is acceptable. The description is complete enough for an agent to call it correctly.

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%, so the description fully carries the burden of explaining parameters. It explicitly defines course_id (restrict to one course, default all current courses), since (only newer than, with ISO or relative examples), and limit (maximum number). This is thorough and compensates completely for the lack of schema descriptions.

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 tool retrieves recent announcements posted by lecturers, ordered newest first, and includes the message text of the most recent ones. This is a specific verb+resource with clear scope and distinguishes it from sibling tools like moodle_get_recent_changes (which likely covers broader changes) and moodle_get_content (generic content retrieval). The mention of 'Ankündigungen' adds context for the Moodle domain.

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 description provides no explicit guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives, nor any exclusions. It lists parameters but does not state typical use cases, prerequisites, or contrast with similar tools like moodle_get_recent_changes or moodle_get_deadlines. An agent would need to infer usage from the name and purpose.

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