Get eLearn document metadata

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure, yet it says only 'Get,' which implies a read operation without confirming it. It discloses nothing about authentication requirements (notably relevant given elearn_authenticate and elearn_auth_status siblings), the structure or extent of the returned metadata, failure behavior, or rate limits.

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 clean, front-loaded sentence with no wasted words, which is structurally sound. However, it leans toward under-specification rather than deliberate conciseness, delivering little information beyond what the name and title already convey.

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?

While the tool is simple (two scalar params), the 0% parameter coverage, absent output schema, and missing annotations mean the description must carry more weight. It omits parameter semantics, auth requirements, and return-value expectations, leaving an agent without enough information to call it correctly and interpret the result.

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 description coverage is 0%, so the description must compensate, but it mentions no parameters at all. It does not clarify the semantic difference or hierarchy between courseId and topicId, or how they identify the target document. The description adds zero value for parameter understanding.

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 states a specific verb ('Get') and a specific resource ('D2L content-topic metadata for one course document'). The 'metadata' qualifier and 'one... document' scope clearly separate it from elearn_download_document (which fetches content) and elearn_search_content. It is fairly clear, though it does not explicitly distinguish itself from elearn_get_course_documents, which might also return metadata for documents.

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?

No guidance is given on when to use this tool versus its siblings. It does not state when to prefer this over elearn_get_course_documents, elearn_get_week_documents, or elearn_search_content, nor any exclusions or prerequisites such as prior authentication. Usage context is only weakly implied by the phrase 'one course document.'

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