Get Quiz Submission Answers

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true and openWorldHint=true, so the tool's read-only nature is known. The description adds no additional behavioral context such as pagination, return format, inclusion of correct answers, or response structure. It essentially restates the title without disclosing new traits.

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, concise sentence that directly conveys the tool's purpose without any fluff. It is appropriately sized for a tool with only one parameter and a simple read operation.

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 simple read-only tool with one well-described parameter and no output schema, the description is mostly complete. It could benefit from noting whether the returned data includes question text, correct answers, or just the student's submitted choices, but the openWorldHint and readOnlyHint annotations mitigate the lack of output schema detail.

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 schema provides 100% description coverage for the single parameter (quiz_submission_id), so the baseline is 3. The tool description does not add any further parameter semantics beyond what the schema already states.

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 tool's function: retrieving a student's answers for a specific quiz submission. It uses a specific verb ('Get') and resource ('student's answers for a quiz submission'), distinguishing it from siblings like get_quiz_submission_events (which retrieves events) and get_quiz_question_responses (which focuses on question-level responses).

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 no guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives. Sibling tools such as get_quiz_submission_events and get_quiz_question_responses could be confused, but there is no explicit or implied indication of when to choose this tool over them.

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