List Folders

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true and openWorldHint=true, so the safety profile is covered. The description adds the 'all folders in a course' scope, which is mildly informative, but it does not mention ordering, pagination, nesting behavior, or what folder metadata is returned. This is acceptable given the annotations but not rich.

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 filler or repetition. 'List all folders in a course.' is appropriately sized for a one-parameter read-only tool, and the core action is front-loaded.

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 one-parameter, read-only, list-like tool with no output schema, the description is nearly complete: it states the action, the resource, and the scope. It does not spell out the exact shape of each folder object, but 'List all folders' sufficiently conveys the return type, and no advanced behaviors are expected at this complexity level.

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%, with course_id fully described as 'The Canvas course ID.' The description adds no parameter-specific meaning, but the schema already fully documents the only parameter, so the baseline 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 uses a specific verb-resource pair ('List all folders') and scopes it to 'a course,' which clearly identifies what the tool does. Among siblings like list_files, list_modules, and list_courses, the resource 'folders' distinguishes this tool without further explanation.

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 when to use the tool—whenever a course's folder collection is needed—but it gives no explicit guidance about alternatives or when not to use it. There are no exclusions or comparisons to sibling tools like list_files, so the usage context is only implicit.

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