List Discussions

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true and openWorldHint=true, covering safety and scope. The description adds minimal behavioral detail beyond stating 'all' and 'in a course,' which are already implied by the name and parameter. It does not describe return format, pagination, or any limitations, but given the annotations, this is adequate.

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, clear sentence with no redundancy or filler. It front-loads the main purpose and is appropriately concise for a simple list operation.

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 tool with one parameter, no output schema, and readOnlyHint annotations, the description adequately explains what the tool does. It could benefit from mentioning return format or distinguishing from list_announcements, but it is generally comprehensive enough for an agent to execute correctly.

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%, and the parameter course_id is well-described in the schema as 'The Canvas course ID.' The description adds no additional meaning to the parameter, so a baseline score of 3 is appropriate per the rubric.

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 ('discussion topics') with a clear scope ('in a course'). It distinguishes itself from siblings like get_discussion (single topic), create/update/delete (mutations), and post_discussion_entry (entries), 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 implies usage for listing all discussions, but does not explicitly state when to use this tool over alternatives such as get_discussion or list_announcements. No exclusions or alternative guidance is provided, so the usage context is clear but not fully elaborated.

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