canvas_get_grades

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

The annotations already declare readOnlyHint, idempotentHint, and destructiveHint=false. The description adds that all requests use Canvas GET endpoints and the server cannot modify Canvas, which reinforces the safety but does not add substantial behavioral context beyond the annotations. No contradiction.

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 concise sentences, front-loaded with the read-only nature and a clear statement of functionality. Every word earns its place with 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?

For a simple read-only tool with one optional parameter and no output schema, the description adequately conveys the two operational modes (grade totals vs. assignment breakdown). It could benefit from an example or return format, but it is sufficient for basic use.

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?

The schema covers 0% of the parameter description, so the description must compensate. It does by implying that providing course_id yields a specific course's assignment breakdown, while omitting it returns grade totals. This gives meaningful behavior to the optional parameter.

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 the tool reads grade totals or a course's assignment breakdown, which is a specific verb+resource and distinguishes it from siblings like canvas_get_assignment or canvas_get_submission. However, it does not explicitly name alternatives or provide details on the response format.

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?

There is no guidance on when to use this tool vs alternatives. The description mentions read-only access but does not say when to choose this over canvas_list_assignments or canvas_get_submission, nor does it provide any exclusions or prerequisites.

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