List Gradebook History Days

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint and openWorldHint, so the safety profile is covered. The description adds meaningful behavioral details: it explicitly says the listing is grouped by grader and assignment and filtered to dates with activity, which goes beyond the annotations and helps predict the output shape.

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 front-loads the action and key output characteristics. Every word adds value, with no redundancy or filler.

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 one-parameter, read-only tool with adequate annotations and no output schema, the description is almost complete. It explains the purpose, grouping, and filtering, which is enough for an agent to understand what to expect. It could add details on ordering or pagination, but these are not essential given the tool's simplicity.

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 covers the only parameter course_id with 100% description coverage, so no additional description needed. Baseline for high schema coverage is 3; the description does not add any extra semantics beyond what the schema already provides, but that's acceptable.

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 lists dates in a course gradebook history that contain grading activity, grouped by grader and assignment. This is a specific verb (list) and resource (dates), and it distinguishes itself from sibling tools like get_gradebook_history_day or list_gradebook_history_submissions by focusing on the day-level summary.

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 usage (when you need to know which days had grading activity) but does not explicitly contrast with sibling tools such as get_gradebook_history_day or list_gradebook_history_submissions. There is no guidance on when to choose this tool over alternatives, leaving it to inference.

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