update_new_quiz_item

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

Annotations already mark as destructive and idempotent. The description adds operational constraints (rate limits, serial calls) that go beyond annotations. It does not contradict annotations.

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?

Three sentences, concise and front-loaded. Every sentence adds value: action, optionality, rate-limit warning. No 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?

Provides essential usage context for update operations: partial updates and rate limiting. Lacks description of return value (no output schema), but for an update tool this is a minor gap. Overall adequate.

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 83%, so the schema already documents most parameters. The description adds generic advice ('all fields optional') but no detailed parameter semantics beyond what the schema provides.

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 it updates an existing item (question) in a New Quiz (LTI), distinguishing it from 'create_new_quiz_item' which creates a new item. The verb 'update' and the resource 'existing item (question)' are specific.

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?

Explicitly says 'All fields are optional; supply only what changes' for partial updates. Also provides rate-limiting advice: 'Call serially (not in parallel); for >50 items, chunk and pause between batches.' This is clear guidance on when and how to use.

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