fiuba_grades

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

readOnlyHint=true already tells the agent this is a safe read, so the bar is lower. The description adds useful return-shape context (grade, range, percentage, feedback), which matters because there is no output schema, but it says nothing about authorization scope or behavior when no grades exist.

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?

One compact sentence with no filler, and the key noun (grade report for a course) is front-loaded. It is slightly under-specified rather than verbose.

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 carries some of the return-value burden and does list the returned fields. However, it never clarifies that this is the authenticated student's own report, nor how filtering by course works, leaving the agent to infer call semantics.

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% for the single courseid parameter, so the description must compensate. "for a course" loosely implies the parameter's meaning, but it omits the expected format (integer id) and where that id comes from (e.g., fiuba_list_courses).

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 is a noun phrase that identifies the resource (a course grade report) but never states a verb like "get" or "retrieve". It does not differentiate itself from siblings such as fiuba_get_course or fiuba_assignments, which plausibly return overlapping course data.

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?

There is no indication of when to use this tool versus fiuba_get_course or fiuba_assignments, and no mention of prerequisites such as the student needing to be enrolled. The intended context is only implied by the noun "grade report".

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