blackboard_list_attempts

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true, idempotentHint=true, destructiveHint=false, and openWorldHint=true, so the safety profile is covered. The description adds no behavioral context such as what an attempt contains, whether results are paginated, or any permission requirements.

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 only four words long. While it is front-loaded, it is under-specified rather than concise: it omits essential information that an agent needs to invoke the tool correctly.

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 tool with two required parameters, 0% schema description coverage, and no output schema, the description is entirely inadequate. It leaves parameter meaning, usage context, and return behavior completely unexplained.

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%, and the description does not mention either required parameter. The words 'de una tarea' hint at a task context but do not explain that courseId and columnId are required identifiers, nor do they clarify their format or relationship.

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 'Intentos de una tarea' identifies the resource (attempts) and its parent (a task), but it is a noun phrase with no verb and no scope details. It does not clearly differentiate itself from siblings like get_attempt or list_attempt_files beyond the plural/singular distinction.

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, when not to use it, or which alternatives exist. It does not mention prerequisites, contexts, or any condition for selecting this tool over get_attempt or list_attempt_files.

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