List Course Files

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true and openWorldHint=true, and the description confirms it is read-only. The description adds value by stating the derivation source ('derived from core_courseformat_get_state') and characterizing the output as a 'slim, token-friendly view', which provides performance context beyond annotations.

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 three sentences, concise, and front-loaded with the core functionality. Every sentence adds distinct value: listing groups, derivation, and usage guidance. No redundancy or fluff.

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?

Given the tool's simplicity (2 parameters, no output schema), the description adequately covers what the tool returns (grouped by section, fields) and its read-only nature. It could be slightly more complete by describing the fields, but the context is sufficient for an agent to use the tool correctly.

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 0% and there are 2 parameters (courseid, session_id). The description does not explain what these parameters mean or how they affect the output. It mentions 'cmid' in the context of the sibling tool but not the parameters of this tool. The description must compensate for low coverage but fails to do so.

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 clearly states it lists downloadable files/resources of a Virtuale course, grouped by section with specific fields (cmid, name, modname, url). It explicitly distinguishes itself from sibling tools like virtuale_get_resource (which fetches file content) and virtuale_get_course_state (full state blob).

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 explicit guidance: use this tool to get a list of files and then pass a cmid to virtuale_get_resource to fetch content. It also contrasts with virtuale_get_course_state by calling this a 'slim, token-friendly view', indicating when to prefer this tool.

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