get_new_quiz_item

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true, so the description's 'Get' aligns with this. The description adds no additional behavioral context beyond what the annotations provide, such as error handling or exactly what data is returned. Given the annotation coverage, this is adequate but not enhanced.

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 a single, well-structured sentence that immediately conveys the tool's purpose. It is front-loaded with the action and resource, and contains no redundant or wasted words.

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 (3 required parameters, no output schema, read-only annotations) and the presence of detailed parameter descriptions in the schema, the description covers the basic purpose. However, it does not describe the return value structure or any edge cases (e.g., missing item), which could help an agent more fully. It is minimally 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 coverage is 100% with all three parameters described in the schema (course_id, assignment_id, item_id). The description emphasizes 'by item ID' but does not add meaning beyond the schema's descriptions. Per guidelines, with high schema coverage, the baseline is 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 verb 'Get', the resource 'a single item (question)', and the qualification 'from a New Quiz (LTI) by item ID'. It distinguishes the tool from siblings like list_new_quiz_items, create_new_quiz_item, and update_new_quiz_item, as it specifically retrieves one item by ID.

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 that the tool should be used when you have a specific item ID, but it does not explicitly state when to use this tool over alternatives like list_new_quiz_items. No guidance is given on prerequisites, such as needing the course ID and assignment ID, which are required but not highlighted as context.

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