quiz_video_add_quiz_questionsAppend one or more questions (with their answers and optional images) to an existing quiz.
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| quizId | Yes | Quiz ID in YouTube-style 11-character base64url format. | |
| questions | Yes | One or more questions to append to the quiz. |
Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
Annotations already indicate this is a non-readonly, non-destructive operation. The description adds 'Append' to clarify additive behavior without harming existing content. However, it does not disclose potential side effects or requirements (e.g., quiz must exist, correct-answer enforcement), leaving some gaps.
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?
A single, concise sentence that front-loads the verb and resource, with no wasted words. Every part contributes to understanding the tool's purpose.
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?
Given the thorough schema and annotations, the description adequately covers the tool's function. No output schema is present, but the tool is a simple append operation; the description is sufficient for an agent to select and invoke it correctly.
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%, with detailed descriptions for quizId and the questions array. The description text adds a high-level summary but does not provide additional meaning beyond what the schema already explains. Baseline 3 applies.
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?
The description uses the specific verb 'Append' with a clear resource ('one or more questions ... to an existing quiz'), distinguishing it from sibling tools like create_quiz or update_quiz. It also mentions the included parts (answers and optional images), fully scoping the action.
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 phrase 'existing quiz' provides clear context that this is for modifying an already-created quiz, implying it should not be used for initial creation. It does not explicitly name alternatives or exclusions, but the context is strong enough.
Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.
Add one secure layer between your agents and this server.
Every tool targets a distinct resource and action (create/get/list/update/delete per entity). Overlapping pairs like get_render vs download_render are clearly differentiated by their purpose, and generate_quiz vs create_quiz serve different creation modes. There is no ambiguity between tools.
The vast majority of tools follow a consistent 'quiz_video_<verb>_<noun>' pattern in snake_case. The only deviation is the three discovery tools (get_api_catalog, get_llms_txt, get_openapi_spec) which omit the 'quiz_video_' prefix, though they still use a clear verb_noun structure.
With 30 tools, the server is on the heavier side and exceeds the typical 15-tool guideline. However, the count is justified by the breadth of resources covered (quizzes, questions, hooks, templates, flashcard decks, renders, music, account) and each tool has a distinct role, so the size feels appropriate for a comprehensive API surface.
The server covers full CRUD for most core resources (quizzes, templates, flashcard decks, hooks) and add/list for questions. Minor gaps include no individual question update/delete and no direct render deletion, but these are not critical and the main workflows (create → view → render → download) are fully covered.