Get Blackboard course content

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

The readOnlyHint annotation covers safety, and the description goes beyond it by disclosing the lazy-expansion behavior (only a couple folder levels returned, folder_id required for deeper traversal) plus the structure of each item's 'links' array. This is real behavioral context not present in the annotations, though it doesn't discuss result size, limits, or error cases.

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?

Three tight sentences, front-loaded with what is returned, then traversal mechanics, then next-step tools. Every sentence 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?

With no output schema, the description still conveys the shape of returned items and their links, and points to read_link/get_attachment for consuming them. It is nearly complete for an agent's needs, though it does not mention pagination, item counts, or ordering.

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 coverage is 100%, so baseline is 3, but the description adds meaning the schema doesn't: folder_id is framed as a way to 'go deeper into one folder' relative to the auto-expanded root, which clarifies the traversal semantics rather than just restating the param.

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 (List) and resource (a course's content items) and enumerates the item types returned (folders, documents, files, assignments, tests, links), which distinguishes it from siblings like get_assignments and get_announcements. An agent can tell what this returns without opening a 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?

Clearly explains the traversal model — hierarchy is auto-expanded a couple levels and folder_id drills deeper — and routes to the right siblings for continuation (read_link for links, get_attachment for files). No explicit 'when not to use' or coverage of how it relates to get_assignments/get_grades, but the context is strong.

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