get_quiz

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full burden of disclosing behavior. It only lists output fields (title, description, question count, points) but does not explicitly state that it is a read-only operation, mention permissions, error conditions, or side effects. This is minimal behavioral disclosure.

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, with no wasted words. However, it is a fragment rather than a complete sentence, and its structure is a simple list. While concise, it sacrifices clarity and completeness, making it only adequate in this dimension.

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?

Given the tool's simplicity (2 required parameters, no output schema), the description still falls short. It fails to clearly state the tool's purpose, provide usage context, or explain parameter roles. The absence of any behavioral or usage details makes it highly incomplete for an agent to select and invoke correctly.

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 parameters 'course' or 'quiz_id'. It adds no meaning to the input schema, leaving the agent with only names and types. The description lists output fields, not input parameters, so it fails to compensate for the lack of schema descriptions.

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 quiz: title, description, question count, points.' does not explicitly state the action of retrieving a quiz. It merely identifies the tool as dealing with a single quiz and lists some fields, which essentially restates the name 'get_quiz' without a clear verb or resource. This makes the purpose vague and does not distinguish it from sibling tools like get_doc or get_assignment.

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?

There is no guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives. The description lacks any mention of typical scenarios, prerequisites, or comparisons to other tools such as list_quiz_questions or create_quiz. This provides no decision-making support for the agent.

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