canvas_rubric_list

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden. It discloses that the tool returns specific data (titles, descriptions, points, criteria count) and implies it's a read operation, but lacks details on permissions, pagination, error handling, or rate limits, which are important for a list tool.

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 appropriately sized and front-loaded, starting with the core purpose, followed by additional context and usage examples in bullet points, with no wasted sentences.

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?

Given the tool's low complexity (1 parameter, no output schema), the description is mostly complete, covering purpose, usage, and return data. However, it lacks behavioral details like pagination or error handling, which would be beneficial for a list operation.

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%, with the parameter 'course_id' documented in the schema. The description does not add meaning beyond the schema, such as explaining where to find the course ID or its format, so it meets the baseline of 3.

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's purpose with specific verb ('List') and resource ('all rubrics in a course'), and distinguishes it from sibling tools like 'canvas_rubric_for_assignment' and 'canvas_rubric_get' by specifying it lists all rubrics rather than retrieving a specific one or one for an assignment.

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 provides clear context for when to use this tool ('See grading standards for a course', 'Find rubric IDs for detailed views'), but does not explicitly state when not to use it or name alternatives, such as the sibling 'canvas_rubric_for_assignment' for assignment-specific rubrics.

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