Get Assignment Detail

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true and destructiveHint=false, so safety is covered; the description adds real interpretive context beyond them, namely the caveat that a file in the deposit means something was uploaded, not that the work is finished. That is exactly the kind of semantic warning an agent cannot infer from structured fields.

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 waste, front-loaded with the resource and its contents, and the chaining hint to get-assignment-file-link placed where it is actionable.

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 carries the burden of describing the return payload, and it does so by enumerating the returned sections plus the deposit caveat. It leaves minor gaps (no note on error cases or what happens when the deposit is empty), which keeps it from a 5.

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%, so all three parameters (including term_id's YYYYN format and course_id's group-number requirement) are already documented in the schema. The description adds no parameter-level detail beyond schema; 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?

Specific verb+resource: full detail of a single assignment, with the returned contents enumerated (deadline, instructions, deposit contents, teacher documents, corrected copies). It is clearly distinguishable from get-course-assignments (listing) and get-assignment-file-link (which consumes the file IDs this tool returns).

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 makes the usage context clear: fetch this to obtain the file IDs that get-assignment-file-link requires, which explicitly routes the agent to the sibling. It does not state exclusions (e.g., when to prefer get-assignments-summary), so it stops short of a full when/when-not treatment.

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