List modules

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true, openWorldHint=true, and destructiveHint=false, so the safety profile is covered. The description adds genuinely useful context that modules are returned with nested items and reflect the week-by-week course structure. It says nothing about pagination, ordering, or whether item details are truncated.

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 filler, and the parenthetical item types earn their place by clarifying return shape. Slightly clipped – it reads as a noun phrase rather than a complete statement of action.

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 one-parameter read tool with annotations and no output schema, the description covers the resource and its nested content but leaves the parameter undocumented and omits ordering/pagination behavior. Adequate but with clear gaps an agent would hit in practice.

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?

There is one parameter, course_id, at 0% schema description coverage, so the schema adds nothing. The description implies course scoping via 'course modules' but never mentions course_id, its expected format (numeric vs. string ID), or where to obtain it, so it only partially compensates.

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 the specific resource (course modules) and clarifies that each module carries its items (pages, files, assignments, links), which distinguishes it somewhat from flat sibling listers like canvas_list_pages or canvas_list_files. However, it never states the verb 'list' or explicitly contrasts itself with canvas_course_snapshot, which likely overlaps in returning course structure.

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 explicit when-to-use guidance, no prerequisites, and no named alternative. With 20 siblings including canvas_list_pages, canvas_list_files, and canvas_course_snapshot, the agent gets no help deciding whether modules or a snapshot is the right call.

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