list_forums

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

With no annotations, the description carries full burden. It discloses the return format (JSON array with id, name, cmid, discussion count) and that it lists forums per course, but does not explicitly state read-only behavior, permissions, or edge cases like hidden forums.

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 concise and well-structured: a one-line summary, then Args and Returns sections. No wasted words.

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 list tool, the description covers what it does, the parameter, and the return shape. However, it lacks sibling differentiation or caveats, which would make it fully complete.

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 input schema has a single course_id integer with 0% description coverage, so the description's 'The Moodle course ID' is the only semantic explanation. It clarifies the domain but provides no format, range, or example.

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 'List forums in a course with discussion counts' – a specific verb, resource, and scope that distinguishes it from sibling tools like list_forum_discussions (which lists discussions within a forum) and create_forum_discussion.

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 no guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives. It doesn't mention any exclusions or compare to sibling tools like list_forum_discussions or create_forum_discussion. The only usage context is implied by the purpose itself.

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