List Enrollments

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true, so the read-only nature is covered. The description adds the scope and the API reference, but does not disclose details like pagination, response format, or error behavior. It is not contradictory, but it adds limited behavioral context beyond the annotations.

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, concise sentence that front-loads the primary purpose. It has no fluff and every word contributes to understanding the tool's function.

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 read-only list tool with no output schema, the description is minimal but adequate. It states the purpose and the API reference, but does not explicitly mention return type, pagination, or any special handling. Given the tool's simplicity and the detailed schema, it is sufficient, though more could be added.

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%, so all 6 parameters are already described in the schema. The description's reference to Canvas `GET /users/self/enrollments` gives a hint that the parameters map to standard query parameters, which is useful, but it does not elaborate on individual parameter semantics beyond what the schema provides. The baseline for high coverage is 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 a specific verb ('List'), a resource ('enrollments'), and a scope ('for the authenticated user across courses'). This differentiates it from course-specific tools like list_course_enrollments. The mention of mirroring Canvas `GET /users/self/enrollments` reinforces its exact purpose.

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 scope 'across courses' provides clear context that this is for all of the user's enrollments, not a single course. However, it does not explicitly mention alternatives (e.g., 'use list_course_enrollments for a specific course') or exclusions. It relies on implication rather than explicit routing.

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