Create Rubric

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

With annotations (openWorldHint and destructiveHint), the description does not add significant behavioral context beyond what is implied by 'create'. It does not mention permissions, side effects, or error handling. The destructiveHint is present but unexplained, and the description does not clarify what happens on creation or if it overwrites anything. Minimal value added over 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?

The description is two short sentences with no fluff. It front-loads the verb and resource, then adds the optional association. Every word earns its place, and it is appropriately sized for the tool's complexity.

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?

The tool has nested objects and no output schema, so the description should explain what is returned or any important side effects. It does not mention return values, error conditions, or prerequisites beyond the parameters. Given the complexity, the description is too minimal to be complete.

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 schema fully documents all parameters and nested properties. The description merely restates 'criteria and rating levels' and mentions the optional association, which does not add substantial meaning beyond the schema. Baseline score of 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 verb (create), the resource (rubric), the context (in a course), and the key components (criteria and rating levels). It also mentions an optional association, distinguishing it from sibling tools like get_rubric or list_rubrics which are read-only.

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 clear context for when to use it (to create a new rubric) and mentions the optional linking to an assignment, implying it can be used for that purpose. However, it does not explicitly exclude alternatives or mention when not to use it, so it lacks explicit exclusion but has clear context.

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