get_quiz

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

No annotations exist, so the description carries full burden. It states it returns a Quiz object but does not describe any behavioral traits such as auth requirements, rate limits, or side effects. For a read operation, transparency is minimal.

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 extremely concise, with one purpose sentence and a terse Args/Returns layout. It is front-loaded and wastes no words, but its brevity edges toward under-specification for a tool with no output schema.

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 simplicity of the tool (get by ID) and lack of output schema, the description is adequate. It correctly notes that both course_id and quiz_id are needed. However, it could be more complete by explaining the uniqueness of the combination or the return structure.

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%, but the description simply restates parameter names as 'Course ID' and 'Quiz ID,' adding no meaningful semantics beyond the schema titles. The parameter names are self-explanatory, but the description does not leverage the opportunity to provide richer context.

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 explicitly states 'Get a single quiz by ID,' clearly identifying the action (get) and resource (quiz). It distinguishes this tool from siblings like list_quizzes (which list) and get_assignment (different resource), providing good differentiation.

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 implicitly suggests use when a specific quiz is needed by ID, but it does not explicitly mention when not to use it (e.g., for listing quizzes use list_quizzes) or provide alternative guidance. This is adequate but not exemplary.

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