list_quiz_questions

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

No annotations are present, so the description carries the behavioral transparency burden. It does state the scope ('every') and the returned fields, which implies a read-only listing operation. However, it does not mention ordering, pagination, error behavior, or explicitly confirm that no modifications occur.

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, efficient sentence with no fluff. It is front-loaded with the core scope and output fields, though it could be more explicit by using a verb rather than a noun phrase.

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?

An output schema exists, so return value details are not necessary. However, the description does not explain how this tool fits into the quiz workflow (e.g., after add_quiz_questions or before finalize_quiz) or what course/quiz_id refer to. Given the tool's low complexity, this is minimally adequate but leaves gaps.

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 input schema has 0% description coverage, and the description provides no additional meaning for 'course' or 'quiz_id'. The parameter names are somewhat self-explanatory (course and quiz ID), but the description does not explain formats, relationships, or how to resolve them from other tools.

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 identifies the resource (quiz questions) and states the returned fields (id, name, type, points). Although it lacks an explicit verb like 'list', the phrase 'Every question on a quiz' is clear and distinguishes this from siblings like get_quiz or add_quiz_questions.

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 such as get_quiz or add_quiz_questions. It does not mention prerequisites, context, or exclusion cases, leaving the agent to infer usage from the tool name alone.

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