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

Annotations already declare the safety profile: read-only, non-destructive, idempotent, and closed-world. The description adds useful behavior beyond them, including free/instant access, a result cap of 10, and the returned fields including play_url.

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-loads the core action and resource, then adds the usage condition and return shape efficiently. Every sentence contributes useful selection or invocation context with no wasteful repetition.

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?

With rich annotations, an output schema, and full parameter descriptions, the definition is complete enough for correct selection and invocation. It still adds value by clarifying scope, result count, and the play_url field.

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 100%, so the query and language parameters are already well documented. The description adds no parameter-specific syntax or format guidance beyond what the schema provides, making the baseline 3 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?

States a specific verb and resource: searching a public library of ready-made quizzes. It also differentiates from the sibling create_quiz by saying the user 'does not need a new one written,' so an agent can distinguish this retrieval tool from creation.

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 a clear usage condition: use when the user wants a quiz on a common topic and does not need a new one written. It implies the create_quiz alternative but does not explicitly name it or address the daily_question sibling.

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