list_assignments

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

The readOnlyHint annotation already declares this as a safe read operation. The description adds no further behavioral context (e.g., pagination, whether it returns only published assignments, or performance considerations). With annotations covering the safety profile, a neutral score is appropriate.

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, concise sentence with no unnecessary words, making it easy to parse and retain.

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 list tool with one parameter, no output schema, and a read-only annotation, the description is sufficient. It states the resource and the required identifier without over-explaining. However, it does not mention what information the listing includes (e.g., due dates, status), but that is likely covered by the tool's implicit function.

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 coverage is 100%—the parameter 'course_identifier' is described as 'Course code or Canvas ID.' The description adds no additional meaning beyond the schema, so the baseline of 3 applies.

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 lists assignments for a specific course, with a verb and resource. However, it does not differentiate from sibling tools like list_submissions or get_my_upcoming_assignments, which also deal with assignments but have different scopes.

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 guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives such as get_my_upcoming_assignments or list_submissions. The description only implies a course is needed, but does not clarify scenarios like fetching all assignments for a course vs. user-specific or submission-related lists.

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