list_course_enrollments

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

Annotations already indicate readOnlyHint=true and openWorldHint=true. The description adds no behavioral context beyond that—no mention of side effects, pagination, rate limits, or typical response structure. It relies heavily on the annotations and schema.

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 two sentences, front-loaded with the core action, and uses code formatting for parameters. Every sentence adds value; no wasted words.

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 list tool with 8 parameters and no output schema, the description covers the purpose and key use cases but omits details like pagination, result format, or behavior of openWorldHint. It is adequate but not fully complete.

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 descriptions for all 8 parameters. The description goes further by giving specific usage examples (e.g., 'Use include=grades / include=current_points'), which adds practical value beyond the schema's terse descriptions. This is better than the baseline 3.

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 clearly states the verb 'List', resource 'enrollments', and scope 'within a specific course', which differentiates it from sibling tools like 'list_enrollments' (account-level). It also mentions specific Canvas filters, making the purpose 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 description provides concrete usage tips for several parameters (include, type[], user_id), helping an agent decide when to use them. However, it does not explicitly contrast with the sibling 'list_enrollments' or state when not to use this tool, leaving room for confusion.

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