list_announcements

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

With no annotations, the description must carry the full weight of behavioral disclosure. It does mention the key behavior of distinguishing posted vs delay-scheduled announcements, but it omits other aspects such as pagination, ordering, or any permission requirements. For a simple read-list operation, this is adequate but not comprehensive.

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, efficient sentence that is front-loaded with the action and the key distinguishing behavior. There is no wasted language, and every word contributes to understanding the tool's purpose.

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 the tool's simplicity (one parameter) and the presence of an output schema, the description covers the essential purpose and the notable nuance. It does not mention pagination or filtering, but those are likely covered by the output schema or are not critical for a basic list operation. Overall, it is complete enough for an agent to call it correctly.

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 by explaining the course_identifier parameter. The description only says 'in a course', which vaguely implies the parameter but does not explain its format, allowed values, or how to obtain it. This is insufficient for a parameter with no schema description.

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 verb ('List') and the resource ('announcements in a course'), and adds a distinguishing nuance ('correctly distinguishing posted vs delay-scheduled') that sets it apart from other list tools. It is immediately obvious what this tool does and how it differs from siblings like list_discussion_topics or list_assignments.

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?

The description provides context that this tool should be used to get announcements with the correct posted vs delay-scheduled status, which implies a specific use case. However, it does not explicitly state when NOT to use it or name alternative tools, so it falls short of the 5-point bar for explicit exclusions or alternatives.

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