moodle_init

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

Given no annotations, the description discloses security-relevant behaviors: 'password is not stored' and 'Password goes only via env to the child process.' This adds meaningful context beyond the schema. However, it omits other side effects like overwriting existing tokens or modifying configuration files.

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?

Three concise sentences, each carrying distinct information. It is front-loaded with the core action and avoids redundancy, making it easy to parse.

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?

Despite a clear purpose, the tool has 9 parameters and the description ignores most of them. It doesn't explain setup-related options (out_dir, name_style, course_dir_style, force). While an output schema exists, the description is still incomplete for a complex initialization tool.

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 coverage is 0%, so the description must compensate. It clarifies username format, password env handling, and token preference. But many parameters (force, out_dir, site_name, name_style, course_dir_style) remain unexplained, leaving gaps in how they affect behavior.

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 action: 'Log in to ANY Moodle site and save webservice token'. It specifies scope (ANY site) and the primary outcome, distinguishing it from sibling tools like moodle_probe or moodle_whoami which focus on inspection rather than initialization.

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?

Provides practical usage guidance: 'Prefer token if available' and 'Username format is school-specific — pass exactly what the user uses on the portal.' This gives context for parameter selection, though it does not explicitly name alternatives or when-not-to-use the tool.

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