Delete New Quiz Item

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

Annotations already declare destructiveHint=true, idempotentHint=true, and openWorldHint=true, so the destructive nature is known. 'This action is permanent' adds the irreversibility angle beyond the annotations, which is useful, but nothing is said about cascade effects (student scores, submissions, quiz totals) or permission requirements. A modest addition over what structured fields already carry.

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?

Two short sentences with the target of deletion and the permanence warning front-loaded; nothing is redundant or padded.

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 three-required-param delete with full schema coverage, no output schema, and annotations covering the safety profile, the essentials (what is removed, that it cannot be undone) are present. It would be stronger with a note on impact to student data or quiz structure, but nothing needed to invoke it correctly is missing.

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%, and the schema already documents item_id (including the string-not-numeric caveat), course_id, and assignment_id. The description adds no parameter-level meaning, so the baseline 3 applies when the schema does all the work.

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?

States a specific verb and resource ('Delete an item (question) from a New Quiz') and the '(LTI)' qualifier plus 'New Quiz' disambiguates it from the classic-quiz siblings like delete_quiz_question and delete_quiz. It stops short of naming that alternative directly, so an agent must infer the split from the New Quiz framing.

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?

No when-to-use or when-not-to-use guidance. The sibling set contains delete_quiz_question (classic quizzes) and delete_new_quiz, and the description never says which to pick or what prerequisites exist. The New Quiz naming implies the scope but leaves the routing entirely to inference.

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