Get Assignments

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden. It discloses the returned data types and the user-centric nature ('your submission status', 'your feedback'), which is meaningful behavioral context. It does not explicitly state side effects, but as a read-only getter, the verb 'get' and the listed outputs make the behavior clear enough.

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?

The description is two sentences, front-loaded with the core purpose, and the second sentence provides concrete usage examples. Every word contributes value, with no redundancy or unnecessary detail.

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?

Given the tool's simplicity (one parameter, output schema present), the description fully covers the purpose, the returned fields, and typical use cases. The output schema handles the return format details, and the description adequately positions the tool among siblings.

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?

The input schema has 100% coverage with a detailed description for courseId, explaining it comes from list_courses and providing an example. The tool description adds no additional parameter meaning beyond the schema, 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 clearly states the tool gets assignments (dropbox folders) for a course and enumerates the specific information returned (due date, instructions, attached problem sheets, submission status, submitted files, feedback/score). This specific verb+resource+scope distinguishes it from sibling tools like get_grades or get_upcoming.

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 description provides example user questions such as 'Have I submitted Assignment 5?' and 'What feedback did I get?' which clearly indicate when to use this tool. However, it does not explicitly mention alternatives or when not to use it, so it falls 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.