List course modules

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, and it discloses almost nothing beyond the read operation implied by 'List'. It omits pagination behavior, permission/auth requirements, and the shape or nesting of the returned modules/items.

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 front-loaded sentence with no wasted words, though it is arguably too terse for the parameter and return details an agent would need.

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 annotations, no output schema, and an undocumented required parameter, the description leaves significant gaps for an agent to call this correctly. The parenthetical '(and items)' hints at return structure but does not compensate for the missing course_id semantics and behavioral details.

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 is one required parameter, course_id, which is completely undocumented in the schema. The description only weakly implies that 'a Quercus course' corresponds to course_id, giving no format or sourcing guidance for the identifier.

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 states a specific verb (List) and resource (modules, plus items) scoped to a Quercus course, so the agent knows what it retrieves. It does not explicitly name or distinguish itself from siblings like list_files or list_assignments, but the resource noun 'modules' is unambiguous.

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 versus alternatives (e.g., list_files for content), nor any prerequisites or exclusions. The agent can only infer usage from the name and resource.

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