get_quiz_content

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

No annotations provided, so description bears full burden. It discloses the return type (multiple-choice questions with choices, correct answers, explanations) and source (GitHub repo). Implies read-only operation with no side effects.

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 with no wasted words. First sentence states action and source, second describes output, third provides usage context and examples. Front-loaded with key 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?

With one parameter, no annotations, and an output schema (present though not shown), the description explains what it returns, source, and valid module ids. Sufficient for a simple fetch tool; could add explicit parameter constraints.

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 0% description coverage for module_id. Description adds value by listing example valid modules ('2a', '2b', '3'), providing guidance beyond the schema. Could be improved by explicitly stating the format.

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 action ('Fetch the quiz questions for a module'), identifies the specific resource ('from the dataflowr/quiz GitHub repo'), and distinguishes from sibling tools like check_quiz_answer by focusing on retrieval.

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 'Use this when a student wants to self-test their understanding of a module.' Lists modules with quizzes. Does not explicitly state when not to use, but context with siblings is clear.

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