get_rubric_assessment

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true, so the description adds little behavioral insight. It does not disclose what data the assessment contains, such as rubric criteria or ratings, nor any potential limitations. With no output schema, more detail is needed for an agent to fully understand the response.

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 conveys the essential information without any unnecessary words. It is front-loaded and efficient.

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?

Despite the high schema coverage and read-only annotation, the description lacks information about the output structure. Since there is no output schema, the description should hint at the return type (e.g., rubric ratings, comments). This gap makes the description incomplete for an agent to fully interpret the tool's results.

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?

Input schema coverage is 100%, and each parameter is described in the schema. The description adds value by clarifying the context (specific student submission) but does not provide additional semantic meaning beyond what the schema already conveys. Baseline score of 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 clearly states what the tool does: 'Get the rubric assessment for a specific student submission on an assignment.' It uses a specific verb 'Get' and identifies the resource 'rubric assessment', distinguishing it from sibling tools like 'submit_rubric_assessment' and 'get_rubric'.

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 context for when to use the tool (for a specific student submission) but does not explicitly exclude alternatives or mention when not to use it. Given the sibling tools, some guidance on differentiating from 'get_submission' or 'get_rubric' would be helpful but is not required for clear usage.

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