List Account Courses

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

The annotations already mark this as read-only and open-world, and the description ('List courses') is consistent with those annotations. However, the description adds little beyond the account scoping already implied by the parameter schema; it does not mention pagination, ordering, search behavior, or output shape. No contradiction with annotations exists.

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 a single, front-loaded sentence with no filler or repetition. It communicates the essential purpose efficiently and earns its place.

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 simple read-only listing tool with two fully described parameters and safe annotations, the description is mostly complete. It does not detail pagination or return structure, but the absence of an output schema places a moderate burden on the description; still, the core behavior is clear enough.

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 account_id and search_term already documented in the input schema. The description does not add extra semantics beyond the account scope, but the baseline of 3 applies because the schema fully explains the parameters.

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 and resource: 'List courses under a given Canvas account.' It clearly identifies the account scope, distinguishing it from sibling tools like list_courses or list_accounts. The resource and boundary are unambiguous.

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 phrase 'under a given Canvas account' provides clear context for when to use this tool: when account-level course listing is needed. It does not explicitly exclude alternatives like list_courses or search_course_content, but the scope is evident enough for an agent to select it appropriately.

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