List Eportfolios

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint, idempotentHint, and destructiveHint=false, so the safety profile is covered. The description adds meaningful behavioral context by explaining that other apps cannot add entries and directing the user to edit in Canvas itself, which is useful beyond the 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?

The description is two tight sentences with no wasted wording. The resource is front-loaded and the read-only limitation follows immediately.

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 simple list tool with fully described parameters and rich annotations, the description provides enough context: what the resource is, that it is read-only, and where edits must occur. It does not describe return values, but for a straightforward list operation with no output schema that omission is minor.

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 page, limit, and include_deleted are fully documented in the input schema. The description adds no parameter-specific meaning beyond that, which is acceptable given the complete schema coverage.

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?

The description identifies the resource as the user's Canvas ePortfolios and clarifies they are showcase sites of the user's work. It does not explicitly use a verb like 'list' or distinguish this tool from the sibling get_eportfolio_pages, but the personal scope and read-only framing make the purpose understandable.

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?

The description gives an explicit when-not for editing: 'Canvas does not let other apps add entries, so edit them in Canvas itself.' However, it does not explain when to use this tool versus the related get_eportfolio_pages sibling or mention pagination behavior, leaving usage largely implied.

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