get_quiz
Assessment questions from lesson content. 6 question types for formative evaluation.
Input Schema
TableJSON Schema
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| day | No | ||
| track | No |
Orb Platform
TDQS
C2.4/5.0
Behavior2/5
Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
No annotations are provided, so the description must disclose behaviors. It does not mention side effects, permissions, return formats, or any operational traits—only the content of the questions.
Agents need to know what a tool does to the world before calling it. Descriptions should go beyond structured annotations to explain consequences.
Conciseness3/5
Is the description appropriately sized, front-loaded, and free of redundancy?
The description is brief and front-loaded, but it is a sentence fragment that omits critical information. It is concise but not well-structured for an agent, lacking the detail needed for reliable invocation.
Shorter descriptions cost fewer tokens and are easier for agents to parse. Every sentence should earn its place.
Completeness2/5
Given the tool's complexity, does the description cover enough for an agent to succeed on first attempt?
Given the tool has unannotated parameters and no output schema, the description should compensate by explaining usage and expected results. It does not, leaving the tool incomplete for agent decision-making.
Complex tools with many parameters or behaviors need more documentation. Simple tools need less. This dimension scales expectations accordingly.
Parameters1/5
Does the description clarify parameter syntax, constraints, interactions, or defaults beyond what the schema provides?
The input schema has two parameters (day, track) with no descriptions, and the description does not mention them at all. With 0% schema coverage, the description fails to add any meaning beyond the bare parameter names.
Input schemas describe structure but not intent. Descriptions should explain non-obvious parameter relationships and valid value ranges.
Purpose4/5
Does the description clearly state what the tool does and how it differs from similar tools?
The description 'Assessment questions from lesson content' clearly indicates the tool provides quiz questions, distinguishing it from sibling tools like get_lesson. However, it lacks an explicit verb like 'get' or 'retrieve', relying on the tool name for the action.
Agents choose between tools based on descriptions. A clear purpose with a specific verb and resource helps agents select the right tool.
Usage Guidelines2/5
Does the description explain when to use this tool, when not to, or what alternatives exist?
No guidance is provided on when to use this tool versus alternatives. The description only states content and types, without any context about appropriate use cases or exclusions.
Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.
Try in Browser
Glama MCP Gateway
Add one secure layer between your agents and this server.
TDQS
B3.4/5.0
Disambiguation4/5
Most tools have clearly distinct purposes: dictionary lookups, reverse searches, translation, compliance checking, lesson generation, and knowledge graph exploration. The only ambiguity is generate_text, which overlaps with define_term and translate_word, but its role as a general text generation tool is clear from the description.
Naming Consistency3/5
Naming is inconsistent, mixing verb_noun patterns (e.g., check_compliance, define_term, search_words) with get_* patterns (e.g., get_lesson, get_quiz) and the non-verb word_of_the_day. However, all names are descriptive and readable.
Tool Count5/5
13 tools is well-scoped for a language platform covering dictionary, translation, lessons, quizzes, related words, images, and compliance. Each tool earns its place without redundancy or bloat.
Completeness4/5
The server provides comprehensive coverage for language-related workflows, including lookup, translation, lesson and quiz generation, related words, images, and compliance checks. Minor gaps like pronunciation audio or progress tracking exist, but core operations are well covered.