schoology_get_materials

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full behavioral burden. 'List' implies a read, but it discloses nothing about permissions, pagination, rate limits, or whether the folders are returned recursively. The word 'nested' hints at a hierarchical structure but is not developed.

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?

A single tight sentence with the resource listed up front and no filler. It is appropriately sized, though arguably too terse given the zero documentation elsewhere.

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 one-parameter list tool the description conveys what is returned, which is the core need. However, with no output schema, no annotations, and an undocumented parameter, it leaves the identifier meaning and any pagination/tree behavior unaddressed.

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 the single required parameter (sectionId, a numeric course-section id) is never explained in the description. The phrase 'a course's' gestures at the resource but does not clarify that the parameter is a section identifier or its expected format.

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 clear verb ('List') and enumerates the specific resources returned: nested folders, documents, pages, and assignments. This distinguishes it well from a bare 'get materials', but it never names a sibling like schoology_get_assignments, so an agent has to infer the boundary on its own.

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 when-to-use guidance, no prerequisites, and no mention of the closely related siblings (schoology_get_assignments, schoology_read_document, schoology_list_sections). The agent must guess whether to call this or the narrower assignment/document tools.

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