List Media Objects

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint, idempotentHint and destructiveHint=false, so 'Read-only' largely restates structured data. The one added value is disclosing the returned fields (titles and media IDs), which matters since there is no output schema; pagination/limit behavior is left to the schema.

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?

Three short sentences, front-loaded with purpose and followed by routing guidance. Minor waste: 'Read-only' duplicates an annotation that already carries that fact.

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 two-parameter read-only list tool with no output schema, the description covers purpose, scope and the shape of returned data (titles, media IDs) and points to caption tools. Only minor gaps remain, such as whether results are paginated or course-wide.

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% — both limit and course_id are documented in the schema, including the note that smaller limits are faster and where to get course_id. The description adds no parameter-level detail, which is acceptable at this coverage level but earns only the baseline.

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 (list recorded lectures / video or audio in a course) plus what the result contains (titles and media IDs). It also explicitly distinguishes itself from the captions siblings, so an agent can separate list_media_objects from get_media_captions without opening either schema.

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?

Usage is implied by 'in a course' plus the required course_id, and the follow-up routing to get_media_captions/download_media_captions is genuinely useful. But it never states when to prefer this tool over other listing tools, nor any prerequisite or exclusion.

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