preview_delete_submission_files

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true and destructiveHint=false, so the description is consistent. It adds specific behavioral context by clarifying that the preview affects files while preserving online text, which goes beyond the annotations' generic safety hints.

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?

A single, succinct sentence that immediately communicates the core action and its effect. No fluff or redundant wording; the key constraint (text preserved) is front-loaded.

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 two parameters, no output schema, and zero explanation of parameters, the description is incomplete for reliable invocation. An agent cannot determine what assignment_id refers to or what the preview returns. The description covers only the high-level purpose but leaves operational details unresolved.

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 0%, so the description must compensate for parameter documentation. It does not mention assignment_id or course_module_id at all, leaving them completely unexplained. An agent would not know the purpose or required format of these parameters from either the schema or the description.

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 states a specific action (preview deletion), the resource (submission files), and the scope (all files), while clarifying that online text is preserved. It clearly distinguishes from the sibling delete_submission_files, which performs actual deletion.

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 does not explicitly state when to use this tool instead of others. The 'preview_' prefix and the existence of delete_submission_files imply it as a safe precursor, but no explicit alternative or condition is given. It relies on naming convention rather than direct guidance.

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