Get Dashboard Cards

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true, idempotentHint=true and destructiveHint=false, so 'Read-only' is somewhat redundant. The description nonetheless adds value beyond the annotations by disclosing the result shape (names, colors, links) and the ordering guarantee, which an agent needs to interpret the response. It stops short of noting empty-dashboard behavior, but the annotations carry the safety profile.

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 sentences, both earning their place. What the tool returns is front-loaded, and the sibling routing follows immediately, with no filler or restatement of the title.

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 zero-parameter read with no output schema, the description supplies the two things an agent actually needs: what comes back (cards with names, colors, links, in dashboard order) and when to choose list_courses instead. Nothing material is missing.

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 tool takes zero parameters, so there is no parameter semantics to explain and the baseline of 4 applies. The description correctly avoids inventing parameters and instead spends its words on scope and routing.

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?

Specific verb plus resource ('Get the course cards on your Canvas dashboard') with the added scope that results come in dashboard order and include names, colors and links. It is immediately distinguishable from list_courses, which is named in the next sentence.

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 routes the agent: use this for dashboard cards, use list_courses for 'every enrollment, including ones not on the dashboard.' The condition that selects each tool is stated, not implied, so no inference is required.

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