Server Quality Checklist

Tool Scores

• get_announcementsA
  3.7/5.0
  Behavior2/5

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

  No annotations provided, and description does not disclose behavioral traits such as read-only nature, required permissions, rate limits, or potential side effects. Only describes return structure.

  Agents need to know what a tool does to the world before calling it. Descriptions should go beyond structured annotations to explain consequences.

  Conciseness5/5

  Is the description appropriately sized, front-loaded, and free of redundancy?

  Two sentences efficiently convey purpose, return data, and example usage. No redundant information, front-loaded with key details.

  Shorter descriptions cost fewer tokens and are easier for agents to parse. Every sentence should earn its place.

  Completeness3/5

  Given the tool's complexity, does the description cover enough for an agent to succeed on first attempt?

  Given low complexity (single param, no output schema), the description covers purpose and param but lacks behavioral context. Missing information about authentication, scope (e.g., only current user?), and return limitations.

  Complex tools with many parameters or behaviors need more documentation. Simple tools need less. This dimension scales expectations accordingly.

  Parameters3/5

  Does the description clarify parameter syntax, constraints, interactions, or defaults beyond what the schema provides?

  Schema coverage is 100% with a clear description for the single parameter (courseId). Description adds no extra meaning beyond the schema, so baseline score of 3 is appropriate.

  Input schemas describe structure but not intent. Descriptions should explain non-obvious parameter relationships and valid value ranges.

  Purpose5/5

  Does the description clearly state what the tool does and how it differs from similar tools?

  Clearly states verb 'Get' and resource 'announcements/news posted by instructors for a course'. Specifies returned fields (title, body, posted date, attachments), distinguishing it from sibling tools like get_grades or get_content.

  Agents choose between tools based on descriptions. A clear purpose with a specific verb and resource helps agents select the right tool.

  Usage Guidelines4/5

  Does the description explain when to use this tool, when not to, or what alternatives exist?

  Provides example queries ('Any new announcements?', 'What did the professor post?') that clarify when to use. However, does not explicitly mention when not to use or contrast with alternatives.

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

• get_upcomingA
  3.9/5.0
  Behavior3/5

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

  No annotations exist, so the description must fully disclose behavior. It specifies the resource (upcoming calendar events and due dates) and implies read-only access, but does not mention edge cases (e.g., if no events exist), output ordering, or any side effects.

  Agents need to know what a tool does to the world before calling it. Descriptions should go beyond structured annotations to explain consequences.

  Conciseness5/5

  Is the description appropriately sized, front-loaded, and free of redundancy?

  Two sentences achieve multiple goals: stating purpose, giving use case examples, and being front-loaded. No unnecessary words.

  Shorter descriptions cost fewer tokens and are easier for agents to parse. Every sentence should earn its place.

  Completeness3/5

  Given the tool's complexity, does the description cover enough for an agent to succeed on first attempt?

  The description is adequate for a simple list tool, but lacks details about return format, sorting, and whether it includes all event types. Given no output schema, more specificity would improve completeness.

  Complex tools with many parameters or behaviors need more documentation. Simple tools need less. This dimension scales expectations accordingly.

  Parameters3/5

  Does the description clarify parameter syntax, constraints, interactions, or defaults beyond what the schema provides?

  Schema coverage is 100% with descriptions for both parameters. The tool description adds no additional meaning beyond the schema (e.g., courseId is already explained as 'ou ID from list_courses'). Baseline 3 is appropriate.

  Input schemas describe structure but not intent. Descriptions should explain non-obvious parameter relationships and valid value ranges.

  Purpose5/5

  Does the description clearly state what the tool does and how it differs from similar tools?

  The description clearly states it gets upcoming calendar events and due dates for a course, with specific example questions. This distinguishes it from siblings like get_announcements (announcements) and get_grades (grades).

  Agents choose between tools based on descriptions. A clear purpose with a specific verb and resource helps agents select the right tool.

  Usage Guidelines4/5

  Does the description explain when to use this tool, when not to, or what alternatives exist?

  The description provides concrete example queries ('What is due this week?', 'When is the next deadline?') that indicate when to use the tool. However, it does not explicitly exclude scenarios or contrast with alternatives, which would be helpful.

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

• get_gradesA
  4/5.0
  Behavior3/5

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

  Describes return content (grade items with grade, points, weight, feedback) but does not mention error handling, authentication, or rate limits. No annotations provided to supplement.

  Agents need to know what a tool does to the world before calling it. Descriptions should go beyond structured annotations to explain consequences.

  Conciseness5/5

  Is the description appropriately sized, front-loaded, and free of redundancy?

  Two sentences with no redundancy, front-loading the main action and purpose. Every sentence adds value.

  Shorter descriptions cost fewer tokens and are easier for agents to parse. Every sentence should earn its place.

  Completeness4/5

  Given the tool's complexity, does the description cover enough for an agent to succeed on first attempt?

  Adequately explains tool behavior for a simple read operation with one parameter. Although no output schema, the description lists return fields. Could mention that grades are for the current user, but 'your grades' implies that.

  Complex tools with many parameters or behaviors need more documentation. Simple tools need less. This dimension scales expectations accordingly.

  Parameters3/5

  Does the description clarify parameter syntax, constraints, interactions, or defaults beyond what the schema provides?

  Schema already fully describes the single parameter (courseId), including its source. Description does not add further semantic value beyond the schema.

  Input schemas describe structure but not intent. Descriptions should explain non-obvious parameter relationships and valid value ranges.

  Purpose5/5

  Does the description clearly state what the tool does and how it differs from similar tools?

  Clearly specifies verb 'Get', resource 'grades', and scope 'for a course'. Differentiates from sibling tools like get_announcements or list_courses.

  Agents choose between tools based on descriptions. A clear purpose with a specific verb and resource helps agents select the right tool.

  Usage Guidelines4/5

  Does the description explain when to use this tool, when not to, or what alternatives exist?

  Provides concrete query examples ('What are my grades?', 'How did I do on the midterm?') that indicate when to use the tool. However, lacks explicit when-not-to-use or alternative tools.

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

• get_contentA
  4.1/5.0
  Behavior3/5

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

  No annotations are provided, so the description carries full burden. It discloses the tool is a read operation that returns a nested TOC. However, it lacks details about any access requirements, pagination, or whether only published content is returned. This is adequate for a simple list tool but could be more transparent.

  Agents need to know what a tool does to the world before calling it. Descriptions should go beyond structured annotations to explain consequences.

  Conciseness5/5

  Is the description appropriately sized, front-loaded, and free of redundancy?

  The description is extremely concise: two sentences with no fluff. The first sentence states the core purpose and output format, and the second provides example use cases. Every word adds value.

  Shorter descriptions cost fewer tokens and are easier for agents to parse. Every sentence should earn its place.

  Completeness5/5

  Given the tool's complexity, does the description cover enough for an agent to succeed on first attempt?

  Given the simplicity (single parameter, no output schema, no nested objects, and clear sibling tools), the description is complete. It explains the output (nested table of contents) and gives concrete examples. No critical information is missing for an agent to correctly invoke this tool.

  Complex tools with many parameters or behaviors need more documentation. Simple tools need less. This dimension scales expectations accordingly.

  Parameters3/5

  Does the description clarify parameter syntax, constraints, interactions, or defaults beyond what the schema provides?

  The schema already provides a high-coverage description for the only parameter (courseId as 'The course org unit (ou) ID from list_courses'). The description adds context by implying the parameter identifies the course, but does not add significant new meaning beyond the schema. Baseline 3 is appropriate.

  Input schemas describe structure but not intent. Descriptions should explain non-obvious parameter relationships and valid value ranges.

  Purpose5/5

  Does the description clearly state what the tool does and how it differs from similar tools?

  The description clearly states the tool's purpose: 'List the content modules and materials... for a course as a nested table of contents.' It provides specific verb ('list') and resource ('content modules and materials'), and the title 'Get Course Content' reinforces this. The examples delineate it from siblings like get_announcements or get_grades.

  Agents choose between tools based on descriptions. A clear purpose with a specific verb and resource helps agents select the right tool.

  Usage Guidelines4/5

  Does the description explain when to use this tool, when not to, or what alternatives exist?

  The description includes example queries ('What materials are in week 3?', 'Where are the lecture slides?') that help the agent understand when to use this tool. It implicitly distinguishes from sibling tools by focusing on content structure. However, it does not explicitly state when not to use it or list alternatives.

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

• list_coursesA
  4.3/5.0
  Behavior3/5

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

  No annotations are provided, leaving the description as the sole source. It states the tool returns course names and IDs, which is basic behavioral info, but does not disclose authentication, rate limits, or any other side effects. The behavior is straightforward but not exhaustive.

  Agents need to know what a tool does to the world before calling it. Descriptions should go beyond structured annotations to explain consequences.

  Conciseness5/5

  Is the description appropriately sized, front-loaded, and free of redundancy?

  Two sentences with no redundant words. Essential information is front-loaded: the action, the platform, the output, and its usage. Every sentence earns its place.

  Shorter descriptions cost fewer tokens and are easier for agents to parse. Every sentence should earn its place.

  Completeness5/5

  Given the tool's complexity, does the description cover enough for an agent to succeed on first attempt?

  Given no output schema, the description sufficiently explains the return values and their purpose. Sibling tools (e.g., get_announcements) require a courseId, so this tool's role as a prerequisite is clear. The description is complete for a parameterless list tool.

  Complex tools with many parameters or behaviors need more documentation. Simple tools need less. This dimension scales expectations accordingly.

  Parameters4/5

  Does the description clarify parameter syntax, constraints, interactions, or defaults beyond what the schema provides?

  The tool has no parameters, so schema coverage is 100%. Baseline for 0 params is 4. The description adds value by explaining the output format and how it integrates with other tools, exceeding the baseline.

  Input schemas describe structure but not intent. Descriptions should explain non-obvious parameter relationships and valid value ranges.

  Purpose5/5

  Does the description clearly state what the tool does and how it differs from similar tools?

  The description explicitly states it lists courses the user is enrolled in on Waterloo LEARN, specifies the output (course names and ou IDs), explains their use by other tools, and gives a canonical query. This clearly distinguishes it from sibling tools that operate on individual courses.

  Agents choose between tools based on descriptions. A clear purpose with a specific verb and resource helps agents select the right tool.

  Usage Guidelines4/5

  Does the description explain when to use this tool, when not to, or what alternatives exist?

  The description includes a direct use case ('What courses am I taking?') and explains that the returned IDs are used as courseId by other tools, implying this tool should be called first. However, it does not explicitly mention when not to use it or alternatives.

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