Get Rubric

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true and openWorldHint=true, and the description aligns with a read-only operation. It adds the useful detail that criteria are included in the response, but it does not disclose other behavioral aspects such as possible errors, authentication needs, or response structure.

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, front-loaded sentence with no filler. Every word contributes meaning: 'details', 'single rubric', 'by ID', and 'including criteria'.

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 getter with no output schema, the description adequately conveys the primary return content (rubric details including criteria). It could be slightly richer in describing returned fields, but given the tool's simplicity and the strong annotation support, it is sufficiently 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?

The input schema covers 100% of parameters with clear descriptions for course_id and rubric_id. The description's 'by ID' is redundant with the schema and adds no additional semantic meaning beyond what is already provided.

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?

Description uses specific verb 'Get' and resource 'rubric', with clear qualifiers 'single', 'by ID', and 'including criteria'. It distinguishes from sibling tools like list_rubrics (which lists) and get_rubric_assessment (which focuses on assessments).

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 phrase 'by ID' implies the user must have a rubric ID, providing some usage context. However, the description does not explicitly state when to prefer this tool over siblings like list_rubrics, nor does it mention any exclusions or alternatives.

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