List Overdue Assignments

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

Annotations already cover the safety profile (readOnly, idempotent, openWorld, non-destructive), so repeating 'Read-only' adds nothing. The description does earn its place by disclosing cost behavior — it scans each active course and is slower — which the annotations cannot express. It does not say how many requests the scan costs or whether it paginates.

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 tight sentences with no filler: scope first, then the sibling comparison. Every clause carries information about behavior or routing.

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 list tool with no output schema, the entry needs purpose, relative cost, and routing — all present. Remaining gaps are minor but real: no indication of result shape or ordering, and no clarification of whether the scan respects the limit parameter across courses.

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?

Only one optional parameter (limit) and schema coverage is 100%, so the schema already documents its meaning and that smaller is faster. The description adds no syntax or scoping detail, such as whether limit applies per course or to the combined result — a real ambiguity given the multi-course scan. Baseline 3.

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, resource, and filter scope: lists assignments past their due date and not submitted, across all active courses. It explicitly differentiates itself from the closest sibling (list_missing_submissions) rather than leaving the agent to guess.

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?

Names the alternative and the tradeoff: list_missing_submissions is faster but depends on Canvas's missing flag, while this one catches unflagged items. The choosing condition is implied clearly by that tradeoff, though it never states an explicit 'use this when' rule or a cost threshold.

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