Get Quiz Submission Time

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint, idempotentHint and destructiveHint=false, so 'Read-only' adds nothing. What does add value is the disclosure that this only applies to in-progress timed attempts and that the response is time remaining plus end time, which tells the agent the failure mode for non-timed or submitted attempts.

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 the capability stated first, then the safety/scope note, then the prerequisite. Nothing is padded and nothing is buried.

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 usefully names the two returned values, and all three required parameters are fully documented in the schema. It stops short of describing behavior when the attempt is not timed or already submitted, which an agent would want before calling.

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% and already documents all three IDs, including that submission_id comes from get_my_quiz_submission. The description merely repeats that provenance, so it provides no semantics beyond the schema — the baseline 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?

States a specific verb and resource (get the time remaining and end time) and scopes it to an in-progress timed quiz attempt. It is clearly distinguishable from get_my_quiz_submission, which it names as the source of the required ID rather than as a substitute.

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 clause 'for an in-progress timed quiz attempt' tells the agent the precondition for calling it, and the prerequisite is spelled out ('Needs the submission ID from get_my_quiz_submission'). It does not explicitly say what to do for untimed quizzes or name a fallback tool, which keeps it short of a 5.

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