blackboard_list_contents

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

With no annotations, the description carries the burden. It discloses that the tool lists content and that parentId navigates into subfolders. While it doesn't mention return format or pagination, the tool is a straightforward read operation with no side effects, so the disclosure is sufficient.

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 concise sentences: the first states the main purpose, the second explains navigation. No filler or redundant information.

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?

The tool is simple, and the description covers purpose and navigation. It doesn't detail what 'content items' include (e.g., files, folders, assignments), but this is a minor ambiguity given Blackboard's standard terminology and the presence of distinct sibling tools.

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%, with both parameters well described. The description adds value by explicitly saying 'Use parentId to navigate into subfolders', which clarifies the parentId parameter's purpose beyond the schema description.

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 uses a specific verb ('List') and resource ('content items') with scope ('inside a course or folder'). It clearly distinguishes itself from sibling tools like list_courses, list_announcements, and list_people by focusing on course content structure.

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 usage context: when to list contents and how to navigate into subfolders using parentId. It does not explicitly mention alternatives or exclusions, but the guidance is adequate for the tool's simple navigational purpose.

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