Search Monash Moodle course forums and announcements by course or keyword; omit query to see recent announcements. Returns summaries, snippets, and links.
查看/搜索 Moodle 公告和论坛：无 query 看公告，有 query 搜索。Ed 讨论请用 search_ed_threads。返回公告或匹配帖子摘要、正文片段和链接。
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| limit | No | 数量参数；默认公告5、搜索10 | |
| query | No | 搜索词；省略=最近公告 | |
| course | No | 课程号，如 FIT2102；省略=全部 |
Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.
v0.1.4Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
The readOnlyHint annotation already covers the safety profile. The description adds return behavior: announcements or matching post summaries, body snippets, and links. It does not discuss pagination, rate limits, or auth, but those are less critical for a simple read-only search 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?
Very compact and front-loaded: the core behavior appears first, followed by the key alternative and return summary. Every clause earns its place 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?
For a read-only search tool with full schema coverage and annotations covering safety, the description supplies the missing context: query/no-query behavior, sibling routing, and expected return content. No output schema exists, but the description adequately summarizes returns.
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%, so all three parameters are fully documented in the schema itself. The description reinforces the query semantics and return shape but adds little parameter-level detail beyond what the schema already provides.
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: viewing/searching Moodle announcements and forums. It also distinguishes the query/no-query behavior and names the sibling tool search_ed_threads for Ed discussions, so an agent can identify its scope without opening the 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?
Explicitly says what to do without a query (see announcements), what to do with a query (search), and which alternative to use for Ed discussions (search_ed_threads). Usage conditions and exclusions are directly stated.
Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.