canvas_get_course

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden. It discloses the returned fields and that max_chars bounds the payload, which is helpful, but it omits auth/permission requirements and whether the call is strictly read-only (only implied by 'Get'). Adequate but incomplete for a zero-annotation tool.

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?

One summary sentence plus a compact args block; the purpose is front-loaded and each line earns its place. Minor redundancy in restating the two parameters already in the schema, but 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 needn't be detailed, yet the description still names the key contents. Both parameters are covered and the default-course fallback is called out; the only real gap is the lack of any permission/authentication note for a tool with no annotations.

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 the description must compensate, and it does: course_id is explained as a numeric id from the course URL with a documented fallback to CANVAS_DEFAULT_COURSE_ID, and max_chars is described as a payload bound where 0 means the server default. That resolves both parameters, though it doesn't reconcile the string type in the schema with the 'numeric id' wording.

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 and resource ('Get one course') and enumerates the returned payload (teachers, student count, syllabus as plain text), which separates it cleanly from canvas_list_courses and canvas_get_gradebook. An agent can identify the tool without opening the 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?

The singular 'one course' plus the required course_id implies the use case (fetch a single course by id), and the fallback to CANVAS_DEFAULT_COURSE_ID is useful context. However, there is no explicit when-to-use vs. when-not guidance and no named alternative such as canvas_list_courses for multi-course retrieval.

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