nb-homework-create

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

With no annotations provided, the description takes on the full transparency burden and delivers: it discloses hidden per-cell anchors, pre-filled answer cells, section pins, essay reflection, and the student guidance it bakes in. It also notes the mirror-image relationship with the grader. It stops short of detailing side effects like file creation or permissions, but the disclosure is strong.

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 two dense sentences that front-load the core purpose and then pack in the key structural behaviors. Every clause earns its place, and there is no fluff or redundancy.

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 no parameters and the presence of an output schema, the description covers the essential context: what the tool creates, how it structures the notebook, and how it relates to `grade-nb`. It could improve by mentioning when to choose this over `build_notebook_assignment_page` or other notebook-related tools, but overall it is sufficiently complete.

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 tool has zero parameters, so schema coverage is trivially 100%. The description does not need to explain any input meaning, and the baseline for 0 parameters is 4. No additional parameter semantics are required.

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 opens with a specific verb+resource: 'Create/prepare an NB (Colab / Jupyter) homework TEMPLATE' and explains its grading purpose. It distinguishes itself from siblings by explicitly pairing with `grade-nb`, making its niche clear.

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?

Provides clear context that it is 'Global' and pairs with `skills/grade-nb`, implying it is the template-creation companion to the grading skill. However, it does not explicitly list alternatives or state when not to use it, leaving some room for ambiguity.

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