get_assignment

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

With no annotations, the description must carry the full burden of behavioral disclosure. It only mentions that the result includes a description, giving minimal insight into output or side effects. It does not disclose read-only status, permissions, error behavior, or any other operational traits.

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 extremely short and free of filler, but it is under-specified. While brevity is positive, the fragmentary nature means it doesn't earn its place as a complete explanation; it sacrifices clarity for conciseness.

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 lacks an output schema and annotations, so the description needs to provide more context about what the tool returns and when it should be used. 'One assignment, description included.' is far too minimal to be considered complete for an agent to select and invoke the tool confidently.

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 0%, and the description does not explain the 'course' or 'assignment_id' parameters. It adds no meaning beyond the parameter names themselves, failing to compensate for the lack of schema descriptions. This is a significant gap for a 2-parameter tool.

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 'One assignment, description included.' is highly vague. It implies the tool retrieves a single assignment and includes its description, but lacks an explicit verb or complete sentence to clarify functionality. It does hint at a distinction from list_assignments but doesn't clearly state the action.

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 list_assignments or read_assignment_instructions. The description does not include any context, prerequisites, or exclusions, leaving the agent to infer usage solely from the tool name.

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