canvas_list_missing_submissions

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 contributes the actual semantics of 'missing' (past-due AND unsubmitted) and the user-vs-observee targeting, but says nothing about result volume, pagination, or grouping by course.

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?

Two tight sentences with the core definition front-loaded and the prerequisite trailing it. No filler, though the second sentence largely echoes the schema's own courseIds description.

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?

A read-only, two-parameter list tool with full schema coverage and no output schema — the description gives enough to select and invoke it correctly. Ordering, pagination, and whether results span all courses by default are the only real gaps, and they are minor here.

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 both parameters are already documented, giving a baseline of 3. The description restates the conditional requirement ('For an observee, courseIds is required'), which is consistent with but largely duplicative of the schema — a slight lift for reinforcing the dependency at a glance, nothing more.

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?

States a specific verb and resource ('List missing homework') and immediately defines the term: 'past-due unsubmitted assignments for the user (or a linked observee)'. That definition cleanly separates it from siblings like canvas_list_assignments and canvas_list_recent_submissions, though it never names an alternative explicitly.

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?

Usage is implied by the scope definition (reach for this when you want overdue/never-submitted work), and the observee case gets a concrete prerequisite. However, there is no explicit when-not guidance and no named alternative for adjacent needs such as listing all assignments or recently submitted work.

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