Задания курса

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

Annotations already declare readOnly, idempotent, non-destructive, open-world behavior, so the safety profile is covered. The description adds that each item carries сроки сдачи and статусы, which tells the agent what fields come back, but nothing about permissions, enrollment scoping, or pagination. Adequate but thin for a tool with annotations doing most of the disclosure work.

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?

One short sentence with no filler, and the resource scope is front-loaded. It is terse to the point of omitting usage framing, but nothing is redundant.

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?

With an output schema present and a fully documented single parameter, the definition covers enough to invoke the tool correctly. It is incomplete on the selection side: an agent choosing among my_deadlines, lms_get_grades, and lms_list_courses gets no basis for picking this one.

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?

There is a single parameter with 100% schema description coverage ('id курса на edu.hse.ru'), so the schema already carries the meaning. The description only implies that results are scoped to that course and adds no format or constraint detail beyond what the schema states.

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 ('Список') and resource ('заданий курса'), names the Moodle module type (mod/assign), and says the payload includes deadlines and statuses. It is not differentiated from overlapping siblings such as my_deadlines or lms_get_grades, which also surface assignment/grade data.

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?

Usage is only inferable from the required courseId: list assignments for one course. There is no statement of when to prefer this over my_deadlines (deadline aggregation) or lms_get_course_materials, and no exclusions or prerequisites.

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