delete_rubric_assessment

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full burden. It discloses the key side effects: deletes the assessment row, clears the grade, and explicitly states what it does NOT affect (the rubric itself, other students). It omits irreversibility, permissions, and error behavior, but the primary impact is well covered.

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 compact and front-loaded. The first sentence states purpose and effects; the second provides retrieval instructions. Every word earns its place with no redundant content.

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?

Considering the tool's simplicity (3 params, no nested objects) and the detailed schema, the description is nearly complete. It covers the operation, the outcome, and the prerequisite lookup. It doesn't mention return values or errors, but for a straightforward delete with no output schema, that is a minor gap.

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?

The schema covers 100% of parameters with descriptions, so the baseline is 3. The description adds meaningful guidance on how to obtain rubric_association_id and assessment_id ('by calling get_rubric with include=["assessments"]'), which goes beyond the schema and helps the agent select and invoke the tool correctly.

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 ('delete a single rubric assessment row') and clearly scopes the action: clearing only that student's rubric grade without removing the rubric or affecting other students. This fully distinguishes it from sibling tools like delete_rubric or update_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?

The description gives clear context for when to use this tool (to clear a single student's rubric grade) and provides explicit retrieval instructions for the required IDs via get_rubric with include=['assessments']. It does not name direct alternatives such as update_rubric_assessment or bulk deletion, so it falls slightly short of a 5.

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