Delete Quiz

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

Annotations already declare destructiveHint=true and idempotentHint=true, so the safety profile is covered. The description still adds real value by disclosing the blast radius — child questions and all student submissions are removed, not just the quiz shell. It stops short of stating auth/permission requirements, so it is a strong 4 rather than a 5.

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 sentences with zero filler. The destructive scope is front-loaded, and the classic-vs-new-quiz routing is saved for the second sentence where it belongs as a disambiguation.

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 two-parameter delete tool with annotations covering the danger profile and no output schema to explain, the description covers everything an agent needs to call it correctly: what it deletes, how much it deletes, and which sibling to use instead. Only permission/authorization prerequisites are unaddressed.

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 both required parameters (course_id, quiz_id) are documented in the schema itself, so the baseline is 3. The description reinforces that quiz_id means a Classic quiz and that course_id scopes the deletion, but adds no format or constraint detail 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?

States a specific verb and resource ('permanently delete a Classic quiz from a course') and immediately bounds the scope by enumerating what is destroyed — questions and every student submission. It explicitly distinguishes itself from the sibling delete_new_quiz, so an agent can route without opening either schema.

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?

Gives an explicit selection condition — 'Classic Quizzes only' — and names the alternative tool for the New Quiz (LTI) case. This is exactly the when-this/when-other guidance the dimension asks for, with nothing left to inference.

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