create_new_quiz_item

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

The description discloses rate-limiting behavior and recommended serial invocation, adding value beyond the annotations (destructiveHint=true, openWorldHint=true). No contradiction with annotations.

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?

Three sentences, front-loaded with purpose and immediate usage guidance. No wasted words, perfectly sized 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?

Covers purpose, rate limits, and serial execution. No output schema exists, so return values are not addressed. For a create tool with complex input schema covered elsewhere, this is adequate but could mention success response.

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 80% schema description coverage, the schema already explains most parameters well. The description adds high-level type information but doesn't detail parameters like course_id or assignment_id. Baseline 3 is appropriate.

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 creates an item in a New Quiz (LTI) and lists the 5 supported types (choice, true-false, essay, matching, numeric). This distinguishes it from sibling tools like create_new_quiz (creates quiz itself) or list_new_quiz_items (lists items).

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 explicitly advises against parallel calls due to rate limiting, recommends serial execution, and for batches over 50 items suggests chunking and pausing. This provides concrete when-to-use guidance and alternatives.

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