Get syllabus

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true, destructiveHint=false, and openWorldHint=true, so the safety profile is covered. The description adds one genuine behavioral fact — that results depend on whether the course uses the syllabus page, implying an empty/absent result is possible — but says nothing about the return format (plain text vs HTML) or error behavior.

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 short sentence with no waste, and the key noun (syllabus text) is front-loaded. The trailing conditional is slightly awkward but earns its place as the only usage caveat.

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 one-parameter read tool with annotations and no output schema, the description covers what is returned and the conditional availability. It leaves gaps on course_id format and the shape of the returned text, which an agent needs to call and consume it correctly.

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 required course_id, so the schema carries no meaning and the description offers none either — it never mentions the parameter, its expected format, or that it identifies a Canvas course.

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 names a specific resource — the course syllabus / course overview text — which is clearly distinct from the sibling page/module/file tools. It lacks an explicit verb and never names an alternative, but an agent can tell what content this returns.

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 only guidance is the conditional 'if the course uses Canvas's syllabus page', which hints at possible absence but gives no when-to-use criteria and never contrasts with canvas_list_pages or canvas_get_page, the closest alternatives for course content.

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