List Discussions

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

Annotations already disclose readOnlyHint and openWorldHint, covering the safety profile. The description adds the scoping detail that it lists all topics in a single course, but does not mention return format, ordering, or pagination behavior.

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?

A single front-loaded sentence with no redundancy or filler. Every word contributes meaning, making it easy for an agent to parse quickly.

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 listing tool with readOnly and openWorld annotations, this description is adequate for basic invocation. It would benefit from noting output shape or pagination, but nothing critical is missing for a straightforward call.

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%, so the schema already fully documents course_id. The description's 'in a course' merely reinforces the parameter role without adding additional semantic detail.

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 ('list') and resource ('discussion topics') with clear course scoping. It is unambiguous, though it does not explicitly differentiate itself from siblings like get_discussion or list_announcements.

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 'in a course' implies the intended use case, but there is no explicit guidance about when to prefer this tool over get_discussion or list_announcements. No exclusions or alternative routing are provided.

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