Get Content Export

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint, idempotentHint and destructiveHint=false, so "Read-only" is largely redundant. The description nonetheless adds real behavioral value by disclosing that the export may still be in progress and that the download URL only exists after completion — a timing trait annotations cannot express.

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?

Two short sentences: the core action and outcome lead, followed by a dependency pointer and a safety note. No filler and nothing buried.

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?

For a two-parameter read tool with annotations and a fully documented schema, the description covers what the agent needs, including the return value (download URL) despite there being no output schema. It only misses guidance on the pending/polling case, which keeps it from a full 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?

Schema description coverage is 100% and both parameters (course_id, export_id) are documented in the schema, including provenance pointers to list_courses and create_content_export. The description adds no parameter-level detail beyond that, so the 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 specific verb and resource — check a course export's status and retrieve its download URL — with the completion condition ("once Canvas has finished") made explicit. It is clearly separable from create_content_export and from file-download siblings.

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?

Explicitly names the prerequisite tool create_content_export, making the create-then-poll sequence unambiguous. It stops short of saying how or when to poll (e.g., re-check after pending status) or what not to do, so it is strong context rather than full when/when-not guidance.

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