list_course_modules

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full behavioral burden. It implies a read-only list operation and indicates the result type, but it does not disclose authentication needs, response shape, pagination, or side effects.

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 a single short sentence with no filler. The key verb, object, and scope are front-loaded, making it easy to scan.

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 one-parameter list operation the description is usable, but with no output schema and no annotations it lacks return-structure details and does not relate to sibling tools. It says what the tool returns, but not in what form or when to prefer it over find_course_module.

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 defines only courseUrl as a required URI with 0% description coverage. The phrase 'на странице курса ... Moodle' adds context that the URL should point to a Moodle course page, but it does not explicitly define the parameter or its expected format.

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 uses a clear verb ('Получить' / get) and a clear object: a list of materials and assignments on a Moodle course page. It is distinct enough from siblings like list_courses and get_assignment_details, though it does not explicitly mention 'modules' from the name.

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?

There is no explicit guidance about when to choose this tool over siblings such as find_course_module or download_module_files. The description only states what the tool returns, leaving selection criteria to inference.

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