get_my_grades

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 that it returns grade items with specific details, which is useful, but lacks information on permissions, rate limits, or error handling. The description doesn't contradict any annotations, but could be more detailed for a tool with no annotation support.

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 front-loaded with the core purpose, followed by details on returns and usage examples, all in two sentences with zero waste. Every sentence adds value, making it efficient and well-structured for quick understanding.

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 no annotations and no output schema, the description does well by detailing what is returned (grade items with specific fields) and when to use it. However, it could improve by mentioning potential limitations or response format, but it's largely complete for a read-only tool with one parameter.

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 100%, so the baseline is 3. The description adds value by implying the tool fetches grades for 'a course', which aligns with the 'orgUnitId' parameter being a course ID, and mentions it's optional if an environment variable is set, providing practical context beyond the schema.

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 verb ('Get') and resource ('your grades for a course'), specifying it returns all grade items with detailed components like name, scores, percentage, and feedback. It distinguishes from siblings like 'get_assignment' or 'get_assignments' by focusing on personal grades rather than general assignment 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?

It explicitly lists when to use this tool with example questions ('What are my grades?', 'What's my score on the quiz?', etc.), providing clear context for usage. No alternatives are mentioned, but the examples effectively guide when this tool is appropriate, making it comprehensive for its purpose.

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