Get documents uploaded or modified during a calendar week

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. It discloses the default time window (Monday through Sunday in local time) and the default scope ordering (pinned, all, explicit IDs), which is useful. However, it omits many behavioral aspects like pagination, result format, handling of hidden/removed items, or authentication requirements. The description provides some transparency but leaves significant gaps.

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 two sentences, tightly packed with essential information. The main purpose is up front, followed by the default time window. There is no filler or redundant wording, making it efficient for agent consumption.

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 7 parameters, no output schema, and no annotations, the description is too sparse. It does not explain return values, limits (maxCourses), behavior of includeLinks/includeHidden, or how results are ordered/sorted. An agent would need to guess many call details. The description does not sufficiently prepare an agent to use the tool correctly without additional exploration.

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 43%, so the description must compensate for undocumented parameters. It adds context for 'scope' (pinned/all/explicit course IDs) and clarifies that courseIds override scope. However, it doesn't explain maxCourses, includeLinks, or includeHidden, whose schemas lack descriptions. The description adds moderate value but doesn't fully cover the parameter semantics gap.

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 tool searches file topics by D2L LastModifiedDate, with specific scope options (pinned, all active, explicit course IDs). It distinguishes itself from course-specific tools by mentioning multiple course scopes, but doesn't explicitly contrast with sibling tools like elearn_get_week_documents. The verb 'Search' and resource 'file topics' make the purpose specific.

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 explicit guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives. It mentions the default behavior (pinned courses, current week) but doesn't state when to choose this over elearn_get_week_documents or elearn_get_course_documents. Agents must infer usage from the scope options without clear decision criteria.

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