Export All Courses

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

Adds real behavior beyond the annotations: it declares no course data is modified, names the output artifact (.imscc), and spells out the two-call dry-run-then-confirm pattern plus host-app confirmation fallback. The 'IRREVERSIBLE' banner sits awkwardly against destructiveHint=false and 'Nothing in the courses changes', but the clarifying sentence prevents a true contradiction.

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?

Three short sentences plus a bracketed workflow note, all front-loaded and free of padding. The confirm procedure is isolated in brackets where an agent will look for it.

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?

No output schema exists, yet the description never says what comes back (an export job ID to poll via get_content_export, or a direct download link), nor how long packaging takes. Since export is asynchronous in Canvas, this is a meaningful gap for correct invocation.

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 coverage is 100%, so the schema already defines both parameters; the description only paraphrases them ('or the ones you pick', preview then re-call with confirm=true). No added syntax or ID format guidance beyond what the schema gives, so baseline 3 applies.

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?

States a concrete verb and resource ('package every active course ... as a downloadable .imscc archive'), plus the scope option ('or the ones you pick') and that it happens 'in one step'. An agent knows exactly what the tool produces without opening the schema.

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?

Gives some timing context ('Use before the term ends') and the confirm prerequisite, but never distinguishes this from obvious siblings such as export_course_archive or create_content_export, which likely overlap. The agent is left to guess which export tool to pick.

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