get-assignment-details

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden. It describes the tool as retrieving details but does not disclose any behavioral aspects such as access requirements, error behavior, or whether it modifies data. Minimal transparency beyond purpose.

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?

Single, focused sentence with no filler. Front-loaded with the main action and lists key outputs efficiently.

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?

Description mentions key output components (description, rubric, deadlines, submission requirements), providing useful context. Without an output schema, this helps agents understand what to expect. Could be more exhaustive but sufficient given sibling tools for specifics.

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?

Both parameters have descriptions in the schema (100% coverage), so the description adds no additional meaning. Baseline score of 3 is appropriate as schema already documents parameters.

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?

Description clearly states the tool retrieves full assignment details, listing specific components (description, rubric, deadlines, submission requirements). This distinguishes it from sibling tools like get-assignment-rubric or get-assignment-feedback.

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?

Description implies use when needing a comprehensive overview of an assignment, but does not explicitly state when to prefer this over sibling tools or exclude cases. The listing of included items provides implicit guidance.

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