edubase_post_exam

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

Annotations already indicate this is a non-read-only, non-destructive, non-idempotent, open-world operation. The description adds context that exams are 'time-constrained, secured assessment instances', which clarifies behavioral expectations beyond the basic safety profile. No contradictions with annotations.

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 three short sentences, each adding value: purpose, hierarchy placement, and assessment nature. No superfluous words, and the key constraint is front-loaded. Highly concise and clear.

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 presence of an output schema (not shown but indicated as true), the description adequately covers the tool's purpose, prerequisite, and core characteristics. It omits error handling or duplicate scenarios, but the annotations and schema compensate for most gaps. Overall complete for a creation 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?

Schema coverage is 100% with descriptions for all 9 parameters. The description does not add new meaning beyond what the schema already provides; it merely restates that exams depend on Quiz sets. Thus, the baseline score of 3 is appropriate.

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 'Create a new exam from an existing Quiz set', which is a specific verb+resource combination. It clearly distinguishes exam creation from other post tools (e.g., post_exam_branding, post_quiz) by emphasizing the hierarchical dependency on Quiz sets.

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 says 'MUST be created from existing Quiz sets', providing a key prerequisite for usage. It implies the tool is appropriate when an exam needs to be built from a pre-existing quiz. However, it does not explicitly state when not to use or list alternatives, but the constraint is clear.

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