Retrieve assignments from the Curricula API by specifying route IDs and using query filters. Get paginated, sorted assignment lists with inclusion options.
List assignments. Calls GET /assignments. Put route IDs in path_params and filtering, pagination, sorting, or include values in query.
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| body | No | ||
| query | No | ||
| path_params | No |
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
No arguments | |||
Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.
v0.1.0Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
With no annotations, the description carries the behavioral disclosure burden. It provides meaningful transparency by specifying the HTTP method and query capabilities, signaling a read-only list operation with filtering, pagination, and sorting support.
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 short and front-loads the endpoint. The second sentence is slightly run-on but still communicates the parameter placement rules without unnecessary 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?
Given the tool's relatively simple purpose and the presence of an output schema, the description covers the essential call mechanics: endpoint, parameter placement, and supported query features. It omits guidance on the `body` parameter and alternative sibling tools, but these are minor 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?
Schema coverage is 0%, but the description compensates by explaining that route IDs go in `path_params` and filtering/pagination/sorting values go in `query`. It never mentions the `body` parameter, leaving one of the three parameters unaddressed.
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 states the tool lists assignments and identifies the exact endpoint `GET /assignments`, so an agent knows the verb and resource. However, it does not explicitly distinguish itself from sibling list tools like `list_account_assignments` or `get_assignment`.
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 gives concrete how-to guidance by explaining where route IDs and query values go, but it never says when to choose this tool over alternatives. Usage is only implied by the tool name and endpoint.
Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.