get_quiz_info

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true, and the description reinforces this with '(solo lectura)' and 'Nunca inicia ni envía un intento', which is consistent and adds genuine safety context. It also discloses what data each mode surfaces, though it says nothing about pagination or limits when listing all quizzes for a course.

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 tight sentences with zero padding; the read-only scope and the two parameter modes are front-loaded, and the final sentence covers the key exclusion.

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 no output schema, the description does the necessary work of enumerating returned fields per mode (rules, closing date, grade, prior attempts). The remaining gap is the zero-required-parameter case: it never says what the tool returns if neither quiz_id nor course_id is provided.

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 100% and both parameter descriptions already state the same semantics (quiz_id returns rules/grade/attempts, course_id returns all quizzes with closing date and grade). The description essentially restates the schema, so baseline 3 applies. It does not clarify what happens when both or neither optional parameter is supplied.

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 (devuelve/lista) and resource (cuestionarios) and explicitly splits the two behaviors by parameter: quiz_id returns rules, closing date, grade and past attempts, while course_id lists all quizzes of a subject. The closing sentence 'Nunca inicia ni envía un intento' distinguishes it from mutating siblings like submit_choice.

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 clear conditions for each parameter mode, so an agent knows which argument selects which behavior. It does not name an alternative tool explicitly, but the explicit negation of starting/submitting attempts implicitly routes that need away from this tool.

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