Get Module Item Sequence

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint, idempotentHint and destructiveHint=false, so 'Read-only' merely restates structured data and earns no credit. The description does add context by naming the return shape (previous and next items), which is useful behavior beyond annotations.

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, front-loaded sentences that state the outcome first, then the use case. The trailing 'Read-only' is redundant with the annotations and slightly dilutes the otherwise tight phrasing.

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 3-parameter read tool with no output schema, the description supplies the key missing piece: that the response is a prev/next sequence. With annotations and full schema coverage carrying the rest, little 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?

Schema description coverage is 100%, so the schema already documents course_id, asset_id and the asset_type enum in detail. The description adds no parameter-level meaning beyond that, 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 specific verb and resource: shows where a piece of content sits in its module, returning previous and next items. The purpose is clear to an agent. It doesn't explicitly distinguish itself from siblings like get_module_item or list_module_items, which would require a 5.

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?

'So you can work through a module in order' implies the navigation use case, but there is no explicit when-to-use vs get_module_item or list_module_items, and no exclusions or prerequisites.

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