set_quiz_accommodations

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries full responsibility for disclosing behavioral traits. It specifies what the tool sets (extra time, extra attempts) but fails to disclose whether accommodations are additive or overwrite existing ones, what permissions are required, or what happens if optional parameters are omitted. This is a significant transparency gap for a mutation 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?

The description is two sentences, front-loaded with the action and scope, and contains no unnecessary words. Every clause earns its place.

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?

Despite having a clear purpose, the description leaves important contextual details unresolved: whether the tool merges or replaces existing accommodations, the behavior when optional parameters are not supplied, and any prerequisites beyond knowing student IDs. With no output schema and no annotations, this is a notable completeness 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?

Schema coverage is 100%, so the baseline is 3. The description adds value by naming the accommodation types (extra time, extra attempts) and by cross-referencing list_students for obtaining student_ids, which goes beyond what the schema provides.

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 purpose: setting testing accommodations (extra time, extra attempts) for specific students on a New Quiz. The verb 'Set' and the specific resource 'testing accommodations' distinguish it from sibling tools that manage quiz content or general quiz settings.

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 provides practical usage guidance by directing users to list_students to find student user IDs. However, it does not explicitly state when not to use this tool or mention alternatives for general quiz settings, so it falls 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.