learnus_list_files

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

Annotations already declare readOnly, idempotent, non-destructive and openWorld behavior. The description adds useful context beyond them: results are pre-filtered to 'safe downloadable' items, and the identifiers returned are opaque fileIds suitable for a later download call. It does not describe cache scope or any cap on results, keeping it short of a 5.

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?

Front-loaded with the core purpose, then usage triggers, then exclusions. No filler sentences, though the second sentence packs three triggers and two prohibitions densely.

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?

With no output schema, the description correctly volunteers what comes back (fileIds plus completion state). Combined with full schema coverage and rich annotations, an agent has enough to call it correctly; only result limits and the exact definition of 'safe' remain unspecified.

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% (scope, refresh, courseId are all documented, including the enum meaning), so the schema carries parameter meaning. The description adds no syntax or format detail beyond it; per the baseline rule, 3 is appropriate.

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 (Discovers) and resource (course materials, PDFs, attachments) and clarifies the return shape (opaque fileIds plus Moodle completion state). This cleanly separates it from learnus_download_file, which retrieves content rather than enumerating it.

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?

Explicitly names the trigger (user asks for course files, lecture materials, PDFs, attachments, downloads) and two exclusions (downloading arbitrary URLs; assuming a file still needs review). Both when-to-use and when-not-to-use are stated.

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