sync_lms_onboarding_state

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

No annotations provided, so description must disclose all behavioral traits. It mentions parsing, scheduling, and payload generation but does not indicate side effects, authentication needs, or whether state is mutated.

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 sentences with no extraneous words. However, for a complex tool, a bulleted list or structured overview could improve readability.

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?

Despite having an output schema, the description lacks prerequisites, error handling, and return value summary. Six required parameters demand more context for correct invocation.

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 has 6 parameters with 0% description coverage. The description only loosely maps quiz_score_pct to 'raw SCORM quiz scores' and implies SM-2 parameters but does not explain lms_student_id, scorm_package_id, or others.

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 it integrates with Moodle/Canvas, parses SCORM scores, executes SM-2 scheduling, and outputs a signed LTI payload. This distinguishes it from siblings like calculate_spaced_repetition and sync_ai_platform_state.

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?

No explicit guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives. The description provides high-level functionality but lacks conditions for use or exclusions.

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