List Appointment Groups

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true and openWorldHint=true, so the agent knows this is a safe read operation. The description adds context about what appointment groups are and the meaning of the two scopes, but does not disclose return format, pagination, or default behavior when scope is omitted.

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 sentences with the core purpose front-loaded, followed by targeted guidance for the key parameter. Every word earns its place; no fluff or 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 simple, read-only list operation with 3 optional parameters and full schema documentation, the description is adequate. It explains both scope options clearly. Missing details like default scope behavior and pagination would enhance completeness, but the schema and annotations carry much of the load.

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?

Although schema coverage is 100%, the description adds a decision-rule layer to the scope parameter ('reservable' = 'groups students can reserve', 'manageable' = 'groups the current user manages') that helps an agent choose the right intent. It does not add detail for include or context_codes, but the schema already documents those clearly.

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 ('appointment groups') and clarifies the domain ('Canvas Scheduler sign-up slots'). It distinguishes the tool from singular get_appointment_group and mutating create/update/delete appointment group siblings by clearly indicating this is a list operation.

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 explicit guidance on using the scope parameter: 'Use scope=reservable to find groups students can reserve, or scope=manageable for groups the current user manages.' This maps a user intent to each scope choice. However, it doesn't mention when to use this tool versus the singular get_appointment_group or related list tools.

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