Open Moodle course activities or resources by cmid to read page text, file lists, URL targets, assignment details, forum discussions, and quiz dates/attempts.
Open any activity/resource by cmid and return its readable content: page text, file list for resources/folders, link target for URLs, assignment detail, forum discussions, quiz dates/attempts.
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| cmid | Yes |
Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.
v0.1.0Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true and openWorldHint=true, so the safety profile is covered. The description adds useful return-content detail by resource type, but does not disclose auth requirements, enrollment constraints, or rate limits.
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 definition is one front-loaded sentence with a compact list of return types. It is appropriately sized and wastes no 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?
No output schema exists, so the description carries the burden of describing return values, which it does for multiple activity types. It is largely complete for invocation, though usage guidance and cmid semantics remain thin.
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% for the single cmid parameter. The description mentions cmid as the identifier for the activity/resource, giving partial semantic context, but does not define its format or relationship to course/module IDs.
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 and resource: open any activity/resource by cmid. It also lists the readable content returned for several resource types. It does not explicitly distinguish itself from siblings like moodle_assignment or moodle_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?
Usage is implied: use this when you have a cmid and want readable content for an activity/resource. There is no explicit when-not guidance or named alternative tool to choose instead.
Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.