List Module Items

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

The description is consistent with the annotations (readOnlyHint: true) but adds no additional behavioral context. It does not mention details like pagination, ordering, or the structure of the returned items, leaving the agent to infer those. Since annotations already cover the read-only nature, the description contributes minimal extra transparency.

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 sentence with no redundant words or extra detail. It is front-loaded and directly states the tool's purpose.

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 list tool with only two required parameters and no output schema, the description gives a minimal but sufficient understanding. However, it omits any mention of the return format, pagination, or what 'items' entails, which could be helpful given the lack of an output schema. It meets the minimum bar but lacks depth.

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%—both course_id and module_id have clear in-schema descriptions ('The Canvas course ID' and 'The Canvas module ID'). The tool description does not add any further nuance about these parameters, so the baseline score of 3 applies.

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 'List all items within a module' clearly states the action (list) and the resource (items within a module). It distinguishes from sibling tools like list_modules (which lists modules) and create_module_item (which creates an item), so it is specific and 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 no guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives. It does not mention when to prefer this over list_modules or get_module, nor does it state any prerequisites or context such as needing a course and module ID beforehand. There is no 'when to use' or 'when not to use' information.

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