list_assignment_overrides

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. 'List' implies a non-destructive read operation, but the description does not disclose return format, pagination, or any edge-case behaviors. It adds detail on override types (section/student) but lacks richer behavioral context.

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?

Two concise sentences. The first states the action and resource, the second provides a practical use case. Every sentence earns its place with no filler or repetition.

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?

Given the tool's simplicity (2 required parameters, no output schema), the description adequately covers the purpose and usage context. It mentions discovering override IDs, which hints at the return value. Minor gaps around pagination or response shape are not critical for this straightforward listing tool.

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 input schema covers 100% of parameters with clear descriptions for course_id and assignment_id. The description adds no additional parameter syntax or format details beyond what the schema already provides, so the baseline of 3 is appropriate.

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 'List' with a clear resource 'date overrides' for an assignment, and specifies the scope (section-specific or student-specific). It distinguishes from siblings like update_assignment_override by framing this as the discovery step before updating.

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 explicitly states 'Use this to discover override IDs before updating them,' giving clear contextual guidance for when to invoke the tool. It implies an alternative action (updating) but does not name the exact sibling tool or provide exclusions.

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