get_assignment

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

No annotations are provided, so the description must carry the behavioral burden. The verb 'Get' implies a read-only operation, and it adds that the result includes description/instructions. However, it does not disclose any potential side effects, auth requirements, or response structure, which is a moderate gap given zero annotation coverage.

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 a single, front-loaded sentence that conveys the core purpose and a key detail (description/instructions) with no wasted words.

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?

For a simple get tool with full schema coverage and no output schema, the description gives a clear sense of what to expect ('full details' including description/instructions). It is slightly generic but sufficient given the low complexity.

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%, with both course_id and assignment_id well described. The description adds no extra meaning about parameters, so the baseline of 3 is appropriate since the schema already documents them fully.

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 tool's function: 'Get full details of a single assignment' with a specific verb and resource. It distinguishes itself from sibling tools like list_assignments by focusing on a single assignment 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?

The description implies usage when you need details for one specific assignment, but it does not explicitly state when not to use it versus alternatives like list_assignments. No exclusionary or alternative guidance is provided.

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