Get Gradebook History Feed

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true and openWorldHint=true, and the description's 'Get' aligns with those. It adds useful context by stating the feed is paginated and that filters/sort are optional, but it doesn't describe the shape of returned entries or pagination behavior. This is adequate but not rich.

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?

A single front-loaded sentence states the core action, scope, filters, and sort option with no filler. Every phrase earns its place.

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 description covers the essential invocation context: required course scope, optional filters, sort order, and pagination. No output schema exists, but for a selection/invocation purpose the missing return-structure detail is a minor gap. It is complete enough for an agent to select and call the tool correctly.

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?

All four parameters are described in the schema (100% coverage), so the description need not add much. It does map 'filtered by assignment or user' to assignment_id/user_id and 'oldest-first' to ascending, but this is mostly paraphrasing the schema. 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 uses a specific verb ('Get'), names the resource ('paginated gradebook history feed'), and scopes it to a course, with optional filters and sort. This clearly differentiates it from unrelated tools, though it doesn't explicitly contrast with sibling gradebook history tools like list_gradebook_history_days.

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 implies the tool is for retrieving gradebook history in paginated form, optionally filtered by assignment or user and sorted oldest-first. It provides no explicit guidance on when to prefer this over list_gradebook_history_days or list_gradebook_history_submissions, so usage context is only implied.

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