canvas_create_module

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full burden and does well: it flags that the call MUTATES the course and discloses the important default that the module is UNPUBLISHED (invisible to students). It omits permission/auth requirements and idempotency, keeping it below a 5.

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?

Front-loaded with the action and the MUTATES warning, followed by a container-vs-items clarification, then a compact per-argument list. Every line adds information with no filler.

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?

An output schema exists, so return values need no explanation, and the description covers the mutation semantics and the non-obvious unpublished default that annotations (absent) would otherwise have to carry. Nothing essential to a correct invocation is missing.

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%, yet the description documents all four parameters with meaning beyond the schema: position is a 1-based slot with omit-to-append semantics, published controls immediate student visibility, and course_id falls back to CANVAS_DEFAULT_COURSE_ID. This fully compensates for the empty schema descriptions.

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?

States a specific verb (Create) and resource (course module), and explicitly distinguishes the module container from its contents by naming canvas_create_module_item. An agent can separate this from canvas_update_module and canvas_create_module_item without opening any schema.

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?

Clearly implies the workflow context by stating a module is an empty container until items are added via canvas_create_module_item, which routes the agent to the follow-up tool. It stops short of explicit when-not guidance or naming canvas_update_module as the alternative for existing modules.

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