List New Quizzes

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

Annotations already cover safety (readOnlyHint, idempotentHint, destructiveHint=false), so 'Read-only' is mildly redundant. However the description adds genuinely non-derivable context: New Quizzes is a separate backend service and may be unenabled, which predicts a failure mode an agent should anticipate. Pagination and result-size behavior remain undisclosed.

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?

Two tight sentences, zero filler: the resource and its returned fields come first, the sibling disambiguation and availability caveat follow. Every clause carries 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 single-parameter, read-only list tool with no output schema, the description does enough: it names the returned fields and the service-availability caveat. Missing only pagination/ordering behavior, which is minor here.

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?

Only one parameter, and schema coverage is 100% — the schema already explains that course_id is a numeric string like "12345" sourced from list_courses. The description adds nothing beyond 'in a course'. Per the high-coverage baseline, a 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?

States a specific verb and resource ('List New Quizzes assessments in a course') and immediately names the sibling it is not ('New Quizzes is a separate service from Classic Quizzes (list_quizzes)'). It also previews the fields returned (due dates, points, question counts), so an agent can distinguish it from list_quizzes and get_new_quiz without opening any schema.

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?

Explicitly routes the agent: this is the New Quizzes path, list_quizzes is the Classic path, and it warns the service 'may not be enabled at your school' — a real precondition worth knowing before calling. It stops short of saying when to prefer get_new_quiz or get_new_quiz_items for details, so not a full 5.

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