list_students

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries the transparency burden. It reveals the output fields (id, fullname, email, lastaccess, roles, groups) and the default role (student), which helps the agent understand the operation's behavior. However, it does not explicitly state that this is a read-only operation or detail limit-related behavior, though those are partially covered by the schema.

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 description is two sentences, front-loaded with the core purpose, and contains no filler. Every sentence adds useful information: the action, the filter, and the return fields.

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 list tool with no output schema, the description covers return fields and default behavior, which is sufficient for basic usage. It does not mention pagination or maximum results, but the schema includes a limit parameter with default and maximum, leaving only minor gaps.

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 schema has 0% description coverage, so the description must add meaning to parameters. It explains that 'role' is a role shortname and notes the default, adding semantic value beyond the enum. However, it does not mention the 'limit' parameter or elaborate on 'course_id', so the compensation is only partial.

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 clearly states the tool's function: 'List enrolled users in a course.' It specifies the primary resource (course users), the verb (list), and adds detail about filtering by role and return fields. This distinguishes it from sibling tools like list_my_courses or get_grades.

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 description implies when to use it (when you need enrolled users in a course and optional role filtering), but it does not explicitly mention alternatives or exclusions. It lacks guidance on when to prefer other tools like enrol_csv or change_role, so the usage context is only implied.

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