quiz-builder

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden. It discloses that all Canvas quiz API calls go through quiz_builder.py, dispatches questions by type, and defers git-program questions to git-homework. However, it does not mention whether updates overwrite or merge existing questions, permission requirements, or other side effects.

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 has five sentences with redundancy: 'building/updating', 'Create a quiz from nothing OR modify an existing one', and 'making/updating' repeat the same core idea. It is clear but could be more tightly written.

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?

For a tool with zero parameters and an output schema, the description covers the essential functionality: building/updating quizzes, dispatching question types, and the API-call policy. It does not explain the 'description summary' or relationship to finalize_quiz, but it is adequate for a methodology-level tool.

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 zero parameters, so description adds little parameter-specific meaning. Baseline for 0 params is 4; the description does not need to explain parameters and instead focuses on scope and behavior.

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 identifies the tool as a global methodology for building/updating Canvas CLASSIC quizzes, covering both question items and the description summary. It distinguishes from sibling tools like create_quiz and add_quiz_questions by emphasizing its global, dispatch-based approach and the use of quiz_builder.py.

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?

Explicitly states 'Use when making/updating any Canvas quiz's questions or details' and covers both creating from scratch and modifying existing quizzes. It also notes that git-program questions defer to git-homework, providing an alternative path, but does not name specific sibling tools to avoid.

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