moodle_sync_all

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

Annotations already declare non-read, idempotent, and non-destructive behavior. The description usefully adds that dry_run only reports changes without downloading, that update_changed controls re-download of changed files, and that a per-course summary is returned. The vague 'Same rules as moodle_sync_course' reference prevents a 5.

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 compact and front-loaded with the main purpose, followed by two brief parameter explanations. The only slight weakness is the cryptic 'Same rules as moodle_sync_course', though it does not add bulk.

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 the output schema exists, the return summary does not need detailed explanation. The description covers action, scope, target directory, and flag semantics. The main gap is that 'Same rules as moodle_sync_course' leaves important behavioral details dependent on another tool's description.

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 for parameter meaning. It clearly explains dry_run ('only report what would change, download nothing') and update_changed ('re-download files that changed on Moodle'), which is exactly what an agent needs.

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 states a specific verb ('Synchronise'), a clear scope ('all active (current semester) courses'), a target ('local download directory'), and a return value ('per-course summary'). It is easily distinguished from moodle_sync_course by the 'all' scope.

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 implies this is for syncing all active courses and refers to moodle_sync_course for the underlying rules, but it never explicitly says when to use this tool versus syncing a single course. 'Same rules as moodle_sync_course' gives context but not a clear routing decision.

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