create_assignment

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full burden. It does disclose two behaviors: the assignment is created unpublished and due_at must be ISO-8601 UTC. However, it does not mention permissions, reversibility, validation, or what happens to invalid input, leaving significant 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?

The description is a single sentence that front-loads the action and includes only essential information. No waste, every word contributes.

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?

The tool has 6 parameters and many sibling tools, but the description is too sparse to provide a complete picture. It does not mention what the return value is, how to reference the created assignment later, or how it fits into the workflow of other tools (e.g., publishing via update_assignment). It is not enough for a create operation.

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?

The schema has 0% description coverage, and the description only adds context for one parameter (due_at format). It does not explain the expected format for course (e.g., ID vs name), constraints on points_possible, or the meaning of assignment_group_id. This is insufficient compensation for the schema's silence.

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The description clearly states the verb 'Create' and the resource 'assignment', and adds a key qualifier 'unpublished' which distinguishes it from update or list operations. This is a specific and unambiguous purpose.

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?

No guidance is provided on when to use this tool versus alternatives like update_assignment or set_due_dates. The 'unpublished' note is a behavioral detail, not usage context. There are no prerequisites or exclusions mentioned.

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