edubase_post_quiz_report

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

Beyond the supplied annotations, the description discloses three security-relevant traits an agent could not infer: the link is unauthenticated, single-use only, and expires after one hour, plus the permission prerequisite. These are exactly the kind of auth and lifecycle constraints that change how an agent should handle and hand off the result.

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 short sentences with zero filler, front-loading what the tool returns before moving to the link's constraints and the permission requirement. Every sentence carries distinct, actionable information.

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 four-parameter tool with an output schema and full schema coverage, the description covers the essential operational facts: the permission gate and the link's one-time, time-limited nature. Minor omissions such as error behavior when the report identifier is invalid are acceptable given the rich structured fields.

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 description coverage is 100%, so all four parameters (quiz, report, format, language) are already documented in the schema, including defaults. The description adds no additional meaning about parameter format or interactions, so the baseline of 3 applies.

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 names a specific verb and resource ("Generate a download link for a report of a Quiz set"), which is precisely differentiated from the listing sibling edubase_get_quiz_report referenced in the schema. It stops short of explicitly contrasting itself with other report/export siblings like edubase_post_exam_report or edubase_get_quiz_report inside the description text.

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?

Usage is implied by the requirement statement ("Needs reporting permission for the Quiz set") and by the schema pointer to edubase_get_quiz_report for obtaining the report identifier, but the description never states when to prefer this tool over the exam-report or export siblings. There are no explicit when-not conditions.

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