preview_start_quiz

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true, but the description goes further by specifying that the quiz and its timer are never activated. This adds concrete behavioral context beyond the read-only flag, making it clear this is a pure preview operation with no side effects.

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 a single, compact sentence that immediately conveys the core purpose and constraint. There is no wasted wording, and the key point (never activates) is front-loaded. It is appropriately sized for the tool's simplicity.

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?

Despite the tool being conceptually simple, it has four parameters with no semantic documentation and no output schema. The description does not explain what the preview returns, what the parameters mean, or any preconditions. The lack of parameter semantics and return value information makes this incomplete for reliable invocation.

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 description provides zero information about any of the four parameters (quiz_id, force_new, preflight_data, course_module_id). Schema description coverage is 0%, so the description must compensate, but it does not. The agent is left without any meaning for these parameters beyond their names.

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's function: it previews the start of an attempt and explicitly guarantees it never activates the quiz or its timer. This is specific, uses a precise verb and resource, and effectively distinguishes it from the sibling start_quiz, which presumably actually starts the quiz.

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 implies this tool is for previewing rather than executing, which hints at when to use it (before actually starting a quiz). However, it does not explicitly name the alternative start_quiz or provide explicit 'when not to use' guidance. The context is clear but not fully spelled out.

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