get_question_bank

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint, idempotentHint, and destructiveHint, so the safety profile is covered. The description adds valuable behavioral context beyond annotations: it returns the bank object rather than its questions, and it states the required OAuth scope.

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?

Three sentences, each earning its place: the first states purpose, the second disambiguates from siblings, the third notes the auth requirement. Front-loaded and efficient with no fluff.

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 simple single-parameter fetch tool, the description covers purpose, scope, sibling distinctions, and auth. An output schema exists, so return-value details don't need to be in the description. Nothing essential is missing.

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 schema only defines the id parameter as a string with no description, so the description's clarification that the id is the 'Skilljar id' adds needed meaning. While it doesn't provide format details, it sufficiently identifies what identifier should be passed for this single-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 states a specific action ('Fetch one question bank') with a specific resource identifier ('Skilljar id'). It clearly distinguishes itself from related operations by explaining it returns the bank itself, not its questions, and by naming the sibling tools used for those other cases.

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?

The description explicitly tells the agent when to use this tool versus alternatives: use list_questions with filter_question_bank_id to get questions, and list_quiz_question_bank_assignments to see quiz usage. This provides clear routing guidance with named siblings and conditions.

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