moodle_setup

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries full responsibility for behavioral disclosure. It describes providing setup schema and auth status but does not mention potential side effects, permissions, or whether it is read-only. The caution about username formats is user guidance, not a disclosure of tool behavior.

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 extremely concise, delivering purpose, usage guidance, and a caution in three short clauses. It is front-loaded and every sentence earns its place.

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?

Given the tool has no parameters and an output schema exists (so return values are covered), the description adequately covers what the tool does and when to use it. It could mention whether the tool has side effects, but the simplicity of the zero-parameter setup reduces the need.

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 tool has zero parameters, so there is nothing to document beyond the empty schema. Per the baseline for no parameters, a score of 4 is appropriate; the description does not need to add parameter information.

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 it provides a universal setup schema and auth status for any Moodle school, positioning it as a first-step tool. It distinguishes from siblings by emphasizing 'universal' and 'call first,' though it lacks an explicit action verb like 'retrieve' or 'initialize.'

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?

'Call first when unauthenticated' explicitly specifies when to invoke the tool, and 'Never invent username formats' indicates users should rely on this tool's data. However, it does not name alternative tools or explicitly state when not to use it.

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