Submit Homework File

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full behavioral burden. It implies a write/submission action but never states whether a submission is final or replaceable with instructors, whether deadlines or authentication are required, or that overwrite defaults to true and can silently replace an existing file — the most consequential behavior for this tool.

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?

A single front-loaded sentence with zero filler that immediately identifies the action and target. It is efficient, though its brevity contributes to the behavioral gaps noted elsewhere.

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?

The output schema means return values need not be explained, and the schema fully covers parameters. However, for an unannotated mutation tool with an overwrite-defaulting flag, the description should at minimum flag the destructive default and any prerequisite session/authentication state, which it does not.

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%, so all five parameters including overwrite, description, display_name and vault path already carry their own documentation and an example path. The description adds no meaning beyond the schema, so the baseline of 3 applies.

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?

States a specific verb pair (upload/submit) and a specific resource (assignment file into an IS MU homework vault or folder), including the local term 'odevzdávárna'. An agent can tell this is the write/submission tool among otherwise read-oriented siblings, though the description does not explicitly name those siblings.

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?

There is no explicit when-to-use or when-not-to-use guidance, and no pointer to get_homework_vaults as the way to obtain the vault path that the required vault_url_or_path expects. Usage is only implied by the tool name and the word 'submit'.

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