list_module_items

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

Annotations already provide readOnlyHint=true. Description adds that it includes pages, but does not disclose pagination, response size, or any side effects. It does not contradict annotations.

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?

Description is short and includes purpose first, followed by an Args list. The Args list is somewhat redundant with the schema but not overly verbose. It is efficient overall.

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?

With a read-only annotation and an output schema (not shown), the description covers the core purpose and required inputs. It mentions including pages, which is specific to this tool. Does not explain output, but output schema covers that.

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 coverage is 0%, so description must explain parameters. It provides a brief description for each: course_identifier as 'Course code or Canvas ID', module_id as 'The module ID', and include_content_details with default. This adds some meaning but is minimal.

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 items within a module, including pages, and the name 'list_module_items' is self-explanatory. It distinguishes itself from siblings like 'list_modules' by specifying it operates on a specific module's items.

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 on when to use this tool versus alternatives like 'add_module_item' or 'list_modules'. Does not mention prerequisites or when not to use.

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