brightspace_list_notes

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint, idempotentHint, openWorldHint=false and destructiveHint=false, so the safety profile is fully covered by structured data. The description adds one genuinely new behavioral fact — that the listing is limited to CLI-imported snapshots rather than the filesystem — but says nothing about ordering, emptiness when no imports exist, or what an entry contains.

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 sentences, no redundancy, with the positive definition front-loaded and the scope exclusion second. Every clause earns its place.

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?

With no output schema and no parameters, the description is the only source of information about the result set, and it never indicates what a listed snapshot looks like (name, path, import date) or whether results are ordered. For a simple enumeration tool that is an acceptable minimum, but not complete.

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?

The tool takes zero parameters, so there is nothing for the description to disambiguate; baseline 4 applies. The description correctly implies a fully unscoped, return-everything listing, consistent with the empty schema.

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?

Names a specific verb+resource: lists local Markdown/text snapshots, with the qualifier that they were 'explicitly imported through the CLI'. That qualifier implicitly separates it from the Brightspace API siblings (get_content, search_notes), but no sibling is named explicitly, so an agent must infer the boundary.

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 second sentence gives a clear negative scope ('Does not read arbitrary local files'), which usefully rules out a plausible misuse. However, there is no positive when-to-use guidance and no reference to search_notes or read_note, which are the obvious alternatives for finding note content — the agent is left to work out that this tool enumerates and those retrieve.

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