Get Blackboard grades

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

The annotations already declare readOnlyHint and openWorldHint, and the description adds meaningful behavioral context: results are scoped to grades visible to the signed-in student and include feedback and grading status. This goes beyond the annotation by clarifying the visibility/auth boundary, though it omits details like pagination or possible empty results.

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 sentences with no filler; the core purpose and returned fields are front-loaded, and the visibility note is placed second. Every clause 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?

For a simple read-only tool with one parameter and no output schema, the description adequately covers what the agent needs to know: what is returned, whose grades, and the visibility constraint. No critical information is missing for correct 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 schema provides 100% coverage for course_id, including format and an example. The description adds only minor context by framing the course as the grade source, so it meets the baseline but does not significantly enrich parameter understanding.

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 names a specific verb ('List'), a specific resource ('the student's own grades for one Blackboard course'), and enumerates the returned fields. This clearly distinguishes it from siblings like get_assignments or get_course_content, which cover different 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?

The description makes it clear the tool is for retrieving a single student's own grades for a specific course, which implies when to use it. It does not explicitly name alternatives or state when not to use it, but the context is strong enough for an agent to select it appropriately.

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