list_user_badges

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the transparency burden. It discloses read-only behavior and the deferral of awarding, but omits details about return format, error handling, visibility rules, or authentication requirements.

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?

Two short sentences; first sentence states purpose and optional filtering, second conveys read-only constraint. No wasted 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?

For a simple two-parameter list operation, the description gives the essential purpose and a read-only caveat. It doesn't specify return structure, but 'List' implies an array of badge records; this is acceptable given the tool's low complexity.

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 documents course_id as an optional filter, and the description reinforces it, while user_id has no schema description but is clarified by 'earned by a user.' It doesn't fully compensate for the missing semantics of user_id (e.g., whether it is a Moodle user ID or requires a specific role).

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?

Description uses specific verb 'List' and clear resource 'badges earned by a user,' distinct from sibling tools like list_students or get_grades. Optional course_id filter further clarifies scope.

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?

States read-only and explicitly notes awarding badges is deferred to v0.6, which sets the expectation that this tool is for querying, not modifying. It doesn't name an alternative for awarding because none exists among siblings, but it clearly implies when not to use this tool.

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