submit_rubric_assessment

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

Annotations provide destructiveHint and idempotentHint, so the description carries less burden. However, it adds no extra behavioral details, such as whether it overwrites or appends, or what happens on duplicate submission.

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?

Single sentence with 10 words, highly concise. No extraneous information.

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?

Missing output schema, the description does not explain return values or side effects. Does not mention permissions or link to related tools (e.g., get_rubric_assessment).

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 has 100% description coverage, so baseline is 3. The description merely restates 'scores and comments' already present in schema, adding no new 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 clearly states the verb (submit) and resource (rubric assessment) with scores and comments per criterion. However, it does not differentiate from sibling tools like grade_submission or create_rubric_assessment.

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?

No guidance on when to use this tool vs. alternatives, such as updating an existing assessment or prerequisites like having a rubric association. The description lacks context for proper tool selection.

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