canvas_update_course

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full burden and does so well: it flags MUTATES, partial-update semantics, the immediate student visibility of publishing, and the Canvas restriction that a course cannot be unpublished after a student submits work. These are exactly the side effects an agent must know before calling.

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 critical warnings are front-loaded in the first sentence, and the Args block earns its place because the schema has no property descriptions. It is slightly list-like and repeats property names, but there is little wasted text.

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 7-param mutation tool, it covers behavior, side effects, field semantics, and per-parameter formats; an output schema exists, so return values need not be explained. Nothing essential for 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%, and the description compensates by documenting all seven parameters: empty-string means leave unchanged, start_at/end_at are ISO 8601 UTC with an example, published accepts True/False/omit, default_view lists the allowed landing pages, and course_id notes its default. This is meaningful added semantics beyond the bare schema.

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+resource ("Edit course settings") and immediately scopes it as a live mutation, which cleanly separates it from read siblings like canvas_get_course and canvas_list_courses. An agent can tell what this does 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?

Gives clear operational context — only passed fields change, and it advises confirming before setting published=True because publishing is immediately visible and hard to reverse. It never names an alternative tool (e.g., canvas_update_syllabus) or an explicit when-not-to-use, so it falls short of the top band.

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