list_courses

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

The description discloses that by default only active enrollments are shown, and explains the include_all parameter. However, no annotations are present, and the description does not mention pagination, rate limits, or authorization requirements, which are relevant for a list tool.

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 (two sentences plus an argument list) and front-loaded with the main purpose, with no wasted words.

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?

The tool has only one parameter and an output schema exists, so the description's brevity is partly justified. However, missing details about pagination or result limits reduce completeness for a list operation that may return many courses.

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 only parameter, include_all, is explained in the description as 'include concluded/past courses too', adding meaning beyond the schema's title and default. Schema description coverage is 0%, so the description compensates well.

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 'List Canvas courses' with a specific verb and resource, and distinguishes from sibling tools (e.g., list_course_files) which list files, not courses.

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 when-to-use or when-not-to-use guidance is provided, but the tool's purpose is clear and alternatives (sibling tools) are functionally distinct, so usage is implied.

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