List Content Exports

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true and openWorldHint=true, covering the safety profile. The description adds the ordering behavior ('most recent first') and course scoping, but does not disclose other behavioral traits such as pagination, result shape, or export status filtering. This is acceptable given the annotation coverage.

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 that conveys the operation, scope, and ordering with no filler or redundancy. Every part 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, one-parameter, read-only list tool with annotations covering safety, the description provides the core facts an agent needs: the resource, course scope, and ordering. It does not describe the return structure, but with no output schema and low complexity, this is a minor gap rather than a blocking one.

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?

There is one parameter, course_id, and the schema already documents it with 100% coverage ('The Canvas course ID'). The description's phrase 'for a course' reinforces the parameter's purpose but adds little semantic value beyond the schema, so a baseline score of 3 is appropriate.

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 states a specific verb and resource: 'List all content exports for a course'. It also adds useful scope ('for a course') and ordering behavior ('most recent first'), which distinguishes it from single-export tools like get_content_export and write tools like create_content_export.

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 gives clear context: it is the list-all variant scoped to a course, so an agent can infer it is appropriate when all exports are needed. It does not explicitly name alternatives or when-not conditions, but none are misleading or necessary for such a straightforward read-only list operation.

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