preview_mark_course_self_completed

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true and destructiveHint=false. The description adds useful behavioral context by stating it checks auto-completion permission and does not alter progress, which aligns with and supplements the read-only annotation. It does not contradict any annotation.

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 a single, clear sentence that front-loads the core function and the non-mutation behavior. Every word adds value with no redundancy.

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?

The description covers the tool's purpose and non-destructive nature, but it omits the return value or how to interpret the check result. There is no explanation of what 'allows' means or how the output should be used. Given the low parameter count and annotations covering safety, this is a moderate gap, but the absence of usage context (e.g., typical flow with mark_course_self_completed) limits completeness.

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 0%, and the description does not mention the course_id parameter at all. The agent must infer the meaning from the parameter name and tool name. There is no guidance on format, required semantics, or how the ID relates to Moodle. The description fails to compensate for the lack of schema documentation.

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 clearly states the tool checks whether Moodle allows auto-completing a course, with a specific verb ('Comprueba') and resource ('curso'). It also explicitly states it does not change progress, distinguishing it from the sibling mark_course_self_completed which likely performs the action.

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 implies a preview role but does not explicitly say 'use this before mark_course_self_completed' or provide exclusion criteria. The purpose is understandable, but there is no direct guidance on when to choose this over other preview tools or its non-preview counterpart.

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