blackboard_raw_api

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries full responsibility for behavioral disclosure. It only says 'raw REST API call' without revealing important traits like authentication requirements, potential side effects of POST/PUT/DELETE, or response format. This is a significant gap for a tool that can execute arbitrary HTTP methods.

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 a single sentence that front-loads the action and includes a clear usage directive. It is concise and wastes no words, making it appropriately sized.

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 that this is a raw API tool with no output schema and no annotations, the description is minimally viable. It explains the tool's purpose and when to use it, but lacks essential context such as base URL handling, authentication, or error behavior. While not completely inadequate, it leaves room for more detail to fully guide the agent.

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 input schema provides descriptions for all four parameters, including examples and enum values, so the schema coverage is 100%. The description adds no extra parameter information, which per the baseline for high coverage earns a 3.

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 the tool's function: 'Make a raw REST API call to Blackboard Learn.' It also distinguishes this tool from siblings by specifying 'Use for any endpoint not covered by other tools,' which is a specific verb+resource with clear 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 provides an explicit when-to-use instruction: 'Use for any endpoint not covered by other tools.' This gives clear context for when to select this tool over the many specific sibling tools, though it does not explicitly mention exclusions for covered endpoints.

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