List discussions

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true and destructiveHint=false, so the description adds value by disclosing that the response includes 'unread counts and due dates'. However, it omits other behavioral traits such as pagination, ordering, or filtering capabilities. The added context is moderate.

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, front-loaded sentence that efficiently conveys the tool's purpose and key output details. No superfluous words or repetition. Every word earns its place.

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, annotations, and no output schema, the description adequately covers the purpose and key output fields. It hints at the response structure (topics with unread counts and due dates). However, it could mention pagination or sorting if applicable, but given the tool's simplicity, it is mostly complete.

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 100% with the sole parameter 'course_id' described as 'Canvas course ID'. The description does not add any new meaning beyond the schema, such as format, constraints, or examples. With high coverage, baseline 3 is appropriate.

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 'discussion topics' with specific additional information ('unread counts and due dates'). This distinguishes it from sibling tools like canvas_list_assignments or canvas_list_announcements, which list different resources. The scope is implied by the course_id parameter.

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 no guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives (e.g., canvas_get_discussion for a single discussion). It does not state when not to use it or mention any prerequisites. The agent must infer usage from context alone.

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