Homework details

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true and openWorldHint=true, so safety is covered. The description adds genuinely non-obvious context beyond that: 'Does not mark it read in Librus' tells the agent the read has no read-state side effect, which is exactly the kind of behavioral detail annotations cannot express.

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 short sentences, zero filler. The core purpose is front-loaded and the side-effect note follows immediately; 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?

An output schema exists, so return values need no explanation, and annotations cover the safety profile. What remains thin is the workflow framing — nothing states that homework_ref must come from a prior get_homework call or how a missing/inaccessible item behaves.

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 homework_ref documented as 'An item's reference from get_homework, unchanged' and account_alias as 'Login alias from list_accounts.' The description adds no parameter meaning beyond that, so baseline 3 applies.

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 and resource: 'Get the full text of one homework assignment.' The phrase 'one homework assignment' contrasts implicitly with the list tool get_homework, but the sibling is never named, so differentiation requires the agent to infer it.

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 implied — an agent must deduce that this is the follow-up call to get_homework for a single item's body. There is no explicit when-to-use, no when-not-to-use, and no named alternative. The second sentence is about side effects, not selection guidance.

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