get_my_grades

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

Annotations already indicate readOnlyHint and openWorldHint, so the tool is correctly flagged as read-only and state-dependent. The description adds the behavioral detail of course_id omission. No contradictions. It does not elaborate on authentication or data freshness, but for a simple getter this is adequate.

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 succinct sentences front-load the purpose and optional behavior. Every word is necessary; there is no filler or redundancy.

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?

Given the tool's simplicity (1 optional param, no output schema, low complexity), the description covers the essential purpose and parameter behavior. It could optionally describe the return format, but the absence does not make it incomplete for an AI agent.

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?

The input schema has 100% description coverage for course_id, and the tool description essentially repeats that information. Since schema does the heavy lifting, the description adds no new param info, warranting the baseline score of 3.

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 action ('Get grade data') and the target ('for the authenticated student'). It distinguishes from siblings like get_missing_submissions or get_submission by focusing on grades, and there is no other grade-specific tool in the sibling list.

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 minimal usage guidance: it explains the effect of omitting course_id ('returns grades across all enrolled courses'). However, it does not specify when to prefer this tool over alternatives like get_student_analytics or list_courses, nor does it mention any preconditions or limits.

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