List Quizzes

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

The annotations already declare readOnlyHint and openWorldHint, so the description does not need to reassert safety. It adds no additional behavioral context such as pagination, sorting, or permission requirements, but for a simple read-only listing tool the existing annotations cover most of the burden.

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 clear sentence with no filler or redundant wording. Every word contributes to understanding the tool's purpose.

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 listing tool with one required parameter, the description is adequately complete: it states the resource, scope, and action. It does not mention pagination or return value shape, but given the simple read-only nature and good annotations, this is a minor gap rather than a critical omission.

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 description coverage is 100%, as course_id is fully documented. The description does not add material parameter nuance beyond the schema, but the schema already provides sufficient meaning.

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 uses a specific verb and resource ('List all quizzes in a course') and clearly distinguishes this listing tool from sibling create/update/delete/quiz-detail tools. It communicates both the operation and the scope.

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 makes the basic use case clear: list quizzes for a given course. However, it does not explicitly mention when to prefer this over related tools like list_new_quiz_items or get_quiz, so alternatives are only implied, not stated.

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