Get Assignment

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint/idempotent/non-destructive, so 'Read-only' is partly redundant, but the description adds genuinely new behavior: instructor-authored prompt text is fenced as untrusted, which warns the agent about prompt-injection content in the response. That is context annotations cannot express.

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, all front-loaded with the return contents first. Only waste is the 'Read-only' fragment that duplicates readOnlyHint, but it costs a few words and does not obscure the payload.

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?

With no output schema, the description compensates by listing the returned fields, so the agent knows what it gets without a dry run. Combined with the ID acquisition path and the injection warning, nothing needed to call it correctly 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?

Schema coverage is 100%, so both parameters are fully documented in-schema and the baseline of 3 applies. The description only repeats the provenance hint for assignment_id and adds nothing about course_id or ID format beyond what the schema states.

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 ('Get') and resource ('one assignment') and enumerates exactly what is returned: instructions, due/lock dates, points, submission types, rubric. The singular 'one assignment' plus the pointer to list_assignments cleanly separates it from the sibling bulk lister.

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?

Tells the agent where to obtain the required assignment_id ('Get assignment_id from list_assignments'), which establishes the call sequence. It lacks an explicit when-not clause (e.g., use list_assignments for a roster of assignments), but the singular scope makes the choice clear.

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