Get My Quiz Submission

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint, idempotentHint and destructiveHint=false, so 'Read-only' is largely redundant. The description still adds real behavioral content beyond the annotations: that the result is the single most recent attempt and what fields it carries. It does not say what happens when no submission exists (error vs empty), which is the remaining gap.

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 short sentences with no filler: the scope and returned fields come first, the sibling routing second. Nothing repeats the schema or annotations at length.

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 returned fields, and annotations cover the safety profile while the schema covers both parameters. The only missing piece is the empty-state behavior for a quiz the user never attempted.

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% and both parameters carry their own descriptions including where to obtain the IDs (list_quizzes, list_courses), so the schema does the heavy lifting. The description only implies a quiz identifier via its subject and adds no extra syntax or format guidance, making the baseline 3 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 ('Get your latest submission for a quiz') with an explicit scope qualifier ('latest') and enumerates the payload (score, attempt number, state, timing). It is clearly distinguishable from the sibling list_my_quiz_submissions by naming that sibling as the all-attempts alternative.

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: use this tool for the current/latest attempt, use list_my_quiz_submissions when every attempt is needed. The selection condition between the two siblings is stated rather than inferred.

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