Get a classic quiz

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint, idempotentHint, and destructiveHint=false, covering the safety profile. The description adds no additional behavioral context beyond the annotations, such as return format or error handling. It does not contradict the annotations, so a score of 3 is appropriate since it adds minimal value beyond what annotations provide.

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 description is a single, front-loaded sentence with no unnecessary words. It communicates exactly what the tool does in the most efficient way, making it perfectly concise.

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 simple get-by-id tool with two required parameters, no output schema, and annotations covering safety, this description is largely sufficient. It lacks explicit mention of the return object or typical error scenarios, but given the tool's simplicity, these gaps are minor. It is complete enough for an agent to correctly call it.

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 both courseId and quizId having descriptions ('Canvas course id' and 'Canvas numeric id'). The description does not add any parameter-specific meaning beyond these schema descriptions, so it leverages the schema rather than enhancing it.

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 clearly states the verb 'Get' and the resource 'one classic quiz by id', which precisely identifies the tool's function. The qualifier 'classic' differentiates it from sibling tools like canvas_list_new_quizzes and canvas_list_quizzes, making it unambiguous.

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 description conveys that this is a retrieval tool for a specific quiz by ID, which is clear from 'by id'. However, it provides no explicit guidance on when to use this instead of list-based tools or any alternative selection criteria. The context is implied but not stated.

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