list_announcements

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

With no annotations, the description bears the full behavioral burden. It hints at a recency window via 'Recent' but never defines it, and says nothing about ordering, pagination, whether results are read-only, or permission requirements for the course.

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?

Front-loaded single line followed by a compact args block; nothing is padded. Minor duplication of schema field names in the Args section, but it costs little.

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 two-parameter read tool with no output schema, the description is minimally viable, but the undefined 'recent' window and absent return/ordering notes leave gaps an agent may need to probe for.

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, and it does document both parameters — notably the useful cross-reference that course_id comes from list_courses. The limit explanation restates the parameter name rather than adding meaning (e.g., default, cap, or paging behavior).

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 the resource (announcements) and scope (for a course) clearly enough that an agent knows what it returns. It is the only announcements-oriented tool among the siblings, so no explicit differentiation was needed, but the phrasing is nominal rather than a verb+resource statement.

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?

No when-to-use guidance, no prerequisites, and no alternatives named. An agent cannot tell from the description when this should be preferred over the other list_* tools or what conditions limit its usefulness.

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