blackboard_get_grade_categories

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint, idempotentHint, and non-destructive behavior, so the safety profile is covered. The description adds that percentages are not provided and the final grade is not calculated, which helps set expectations about the output, but other behavioral aspects like pagination or permission requirements are not mentioned.

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, compact sentence that is front-loaded with the core information and includes a relevant exclusion. It is efficient and every part 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 conveys what the tool returns and what it does not. However, it omits any note on when to use it or how to format the courseId, leaving gaps that could affect 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?

With one parameter (courseId) and 0% schema description coverage, the description does not compensate by explaining the parameter's format or constraints. The pattern '^_\d+_\d+$' is visible only in the schema, and a brief note about the expected format would have added value.

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 states a specific resource ('Categorías publicadas del libro de notas') and clarifies what is returned ('id y título'). It distinguishes itself from siblings like blackboard_get_grade_columns and blackboard_get_grades by focusing on categories, though it doesn't explicitly name alternatives.

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 no guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives such as blackboard_get_grade_columns or blackboard_get_course_gradebook. It only states what the tool does, not the context in which it should be invoked.

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