canvas_create_module_item

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

Annotations already indicate a destructive, non-read-only operation. The description adds valuable context beyond annotations by specifying it is 'Disabled by default' and 'requires explicit confirmation', which are crucial behavioral traits. It also mentions the prerequisite of an approved course. This goes beyond simply restating the safety profile.

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 two concise sentences, front-loaded with the core purpose and containing no redundant information. It efficiently communicates the key action and the critical confirmation requirement.

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 10 parameters and no output schema, the description is too brief to be complete. It omits return value expectations, error conditions, or side effects beyond the destructive hint. It does not explain conditional parameter relationships (e.g., external_url vs content_id) or behavior when adding duplicates.

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%, so the description must compensate. It hints at the type parameter (content item vs external URL) and emphasizes the confirmation parameter. However, it does not clarify other parameters like position, new_tab, or page_url, leaving many fields semantically unexplained.

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's function: adding an existing Canvas content item or external URL to a module. It uses a specific verb ('Add') and resource ('module item'), and distinguishes from siblings like canvas_create_module by emphasizing the item already exists.

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 implies when to use this tool (for existing content items) but does not explicitly state when not to use it or name alternatives. It gives context about needing an approved course and explicit confirmation, but lacks explicit guidance on choosing between this and sibling tools.

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