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 behavioral burden. It discloses critical tenant-specific data access limitations and instructs the agent to read submissionStatus/attemptStatus rather than raw submission fields, explicitly warning against misreporting 'unknown' items as missing. This is rich, actionable transparency beyond typical tool descriptions.

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?

Four sentences, front-loaded with purpose, then return content, usage context, and a critical interpretation caveat. Every sentence earns its place with no redundancy or filler.

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 and no annotations, the description adequately covers what the tool returns, when to use it, and how to interpret ambiguous status values. It is complete for a read-only, single-parameter tool that lists assignments and quizzes.

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% for the single courseId parameter, and the description only restates that omitting it returns all enrolled courses. It adds no new semantic detail (e.g., format, constraints) beyond what the schema already documents.

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 ('Fetch') and resources ('assignments and quizzes') with clear scope ('for a specific course or all enrolled courses'). It also describes returned content (dropbox submissions, due dates, status, rubric info), which differentiates it from narrower siblings like get_assignment_rubric or get_upcoming_due_dates.

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 lists user intents that should trigger this tool: 'assignments, homework, what to submit, quizzes, or assignment details and rubrics.' However, it does not name alternative tools or state when not to use this one, so it stops short of full routing guidance.

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