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 safe-read profile is covered structurally. The description adds only the observee/courseIds coupling, saying nothing about pagination, result volume, or what an unsubmitted item looks like. With annotations carrying the safety burden, 3 is appropriate.

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 short sentences, zero waste, with the core scope front-loaded and the conditional requirement second. Nothing could be removed without losing meaning.

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 two-parameter, read-only listing tool with full schema coverage and annotations covering safety, the description gives an agent everything needed to call it correctly. The only omission is return shape, which is minor given the tool's simplicity.

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% and both parameters are already documented in-schema, including the observeeId→courseIds dependency. The description restates that same requirement rather than adding new semantics, so the baseline 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?

States a specific verb and resource with a sharp scope qualifier: 'List past-due unsubmitted assignments for the user (or a linked observee).' The 'past-due unsubmitted' filter distinguishes it in practice from canvas_list_assignments and canvas_list_recent_submissions, though it never names a sibling explicitly, which keeps it short of a 5.

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?

Provides a clear conditional prerequisite: 'For an observee, courseIds is required,' which tells the agent exactly when to supply courseIds. It offers no guidance on when to choose this tool over the other submission/assignment listers, and no exclusions, so it stops at 4.

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