get_assignment

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden. It discloses what the tool returns and that it accepts either a full URL or an id/course_id pair. It does not explicitly mention read-only behavior, permissions, error handling, or rate limits, though the 'get' verb implies a safe read operation.

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?

Two concise sentences with no filler. The first sentence delivers the core purpose and expected output; the second gives concrete input format guidance. Every sentence earns its place.

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?

The description covers the required parameter and the return content well, but omits the account parameter's role and any operational details such as error behavior or prerequisites. For a simple read tool with one required parameter, this is near adequate but still leaves a notable gap.

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. It explains the required parameter coursework_id_or_url (full URL or id) and how course_id relates to it, but it says nothing about the account parameter, leaving its purpose and usage ambiguous.

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 a specific operation: retrieving details of a single task or question, and lists the returned fields (instructions, deadline, points, materials, submission status). This distinguishes it from siblings like list_pending_assignments or get_course_contents, which have broader or different scopes.

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 when to use the tool: when you already have a coursework URL or id plus course_id. However, it does not explicitly state when not to use it or compare it with alternatives such as list_pending_assignments, leaving some routing to inference.

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