List quizzes

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

Annotations already carry readOnlyHint and destructiveHint, so the safety profile is covered. The description adds real context beyond that: the two quiz models, that New Quizzes arrive via the assignments API, and that due dates and personal submission status are included — exactly the kind of shape-of-results detail an agent needs.

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?

One tight sentence with the distinction between classic and New Quizzes front-loaded; every clause carries information. It loses a point for being a noun phrase with no leading verb, which makes the action slightly less immediate.

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 must describe returns — and it does reasonably well by enumerating the per-quiz fields and flagging the New Quizzes/assignments wrinkle. What is missing is pagination/result-size behavior and explicit parameter naming.

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?

The single parameter course_id has 0% schema description coverage, so the description must compensate. It implies course scoping ('in a course') but never names course_id, states it is required, or gives an ID format — partial compensation only.

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?

Names a specific resource ('Quizzes in a course') and enumerates the returned fields (time limit, attempts, question count, lock window), so an agent can tell it apart from canvas_get_quiz or canvas_list_assignments. It reads as a fragment rather than a verb+resource statement, which keeps it short of a 5.

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 only implied: it's a course-scoped list, so an agent infers it needs a course context. The parenthetical noting that New Quizzes are exposed as assignments is a useful cross-tool hint, but there is no explicit when-to-use-this-vs-get_quiz or when-not-to-use guidance.

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