canvas_list_assignments

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

Annotations declare readOnlyHint=true, so the description is not required to restate that. It adds useful behavioral context by noting the inclusion of the user's submission inline and the bucket filter support. This goes beyond the annotation and gives the agent a clearer picture of what the tool returns and how it behaves.

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 core purpose. It avoids redundancy, and every clause adds relevant information. There is no wasted wording.

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?

Without an output schema, the description hints at the return content ('with the user's submission inline') and identifies the bucket filter. It does not mention pagination, error handling, or exact structure, but for a simple read-only list tool, this is largely sufficient. Slight gaps exist but do not hinder correct invocation.

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 50% (only bucket has a description). The description mentions the bucket filter, but does not add meaning to courseId, which is undocumented in the schema. Since the description does not compensate for the missing courseId description and only repeats the bucket filter concept, it provides minimal added value.

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 clear verb ('List') and specific resource ('a course's assignments'), and adds a distinguishing detail ('with the user's submission inline') that separates it from siblings like canvas_list_missing_submissions. This is precise 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 does not explicitly state when to use this tool versus alternatives. It mentions the bucket filter, which implies filtering capabilities, but there is no explicit 'when' or 'when not' guidance. Sibling tools like canvas_list_missing_submissions are not referenced, so the agent must infer the appropriate use case.

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