Retrieve official assignment grades from FCPS StudentVUE, optionally filtered by class or assignment title, to monitor academic progress.
Get official assignment grades from FCPS StudentVUE, optionally filtered by class or title.
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| query | No | ||
| classId | No |
Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.
v1.0.1Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
With no annotations, the description carries the full behavioral burden. It adds only that results are 'official' grades; it says nothing about authentication requirements (StudentVUE login), rate limits, or what a result contains. For a zero-annotation read tool this is thin.
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?
A single front-loaded sentence with no filler; the optional filtering clause is attached directly to the main verb.
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?
No output schema, no annotations, and 0% parameter description coverage, yet the description is one sentence. It omits return shape (grades, points, due dates), auth prerequisites, and query semantics — significant gaps for an agent to call it correctly.
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 0%, so the description must compensate. 'Filtered by class or title' loosely maps to classId and query, giving an agent a usable mental model, but it doesn't clarify that query is a title/text search nor explain the classId numeric format.
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?
Specific verb (Get) plus resource (assignment grades) and source system (FCPS StudentVUE), which implicitly distinguishes it from the sibling schoology_get_assignments and studentvue_get_grades. The contrast is implied via 'official FCPS StudentVUE' rather than stated explicitly, so it stops short of a 5.
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?
No guidance on when to choose this over schoology_get_assignments (the near-identical sibling) or over studentvue_get_grades. The 'optionally filtered' phrasing describes behavior, not context for selection.
Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.