update_quizzes

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

Annotations only provide readOnlyHint/idempotentHint/destructiveHint flags; the description adds substantial behavioral detail: batch semantics, required id, partial-update preservation, the specific clearing behavior of description_html, and authorization scope. This goes well beyond what annotations convey.

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 compact and front-loaded: purpose first, then batch, then the crucial update semantics, then the sibling routing and auth requirement. Each sentence contributes meaningful information with no filler.

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 low-complexity-schema tool, the description covers the critical behavioral contract: batch, id requirement, partial updates, clearing behavior, auth scope, and question exclusion. An output schema exists for return values. The only notable gap is that available quiz fields are not enumerated, though additionalProperties: true mitigates this.

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 is opaque (0% coverage) with a bare quizzes array of additionalProperties objects, so the description must compensate. It does by explaining that each item needs an id, omitted attributes are preserved, and description_html can be explicitly cleared. It stops short of enumerating the full set of updatable attributes, but the core semantics are clear.

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?

States a specific verb and resource: 'Update one or more existing quizzes' and immediately identifies it as a batch operation. It also distinguishes itself from the closely related sibling by saying 'Questions are not editable here - use update_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?

Provides explicit routing guidance by naming update_questions as the alternative for questions. It also sets clear expectations around batch usage, partial updates, and the required quizzes:write OAuth scope, so an agent knows when and how to use it.

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