list_my_submissions

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

With no annotations, the description carries full burden. It lists included fields (grade, score, late/missing flags) but omits behavioral traits like authentication needs, pagination behavior (limit parameter hint not explained), or ordering. Averages out as adequate but not comprehensive.

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?

Two sentences, front-loaded with purpose and use case. No wasted words, though could combine sentences for tighter structure.

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?

Simple tool with 2 parameters and no output schema, but description lacks parameter details (especially limit) and does not describe the return format (list of objects). Insufficient for reliable invocation.

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 description must explain parameters. It only implicitly mentions course_id ('for a course') but does not describe the limit parameter (e.g., what it controls, default value). No parameter semantics provided.

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?

Description clearly states 'List the current student's submissions for a course' with specific fields (grade, score, late/missing flags). Distinguishes from sibling tools like list_assignments by focusing on submissions and the current student.

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?

Explicitly says 'Use to detect grade drops and missing work' providing a use case, but does not mention when not to use it or contrast with alternatives like list_assignments or get_assignment.

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