Get assignment

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true, destructiveHint=false, and openWorldHint=true, so the safety profile is covered. The description adds useful return context ('description as text' — i.e. HTML is converted, not raw), but says nothing about behavior when the assignment_id is invalid or belongs to another course.

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 zero filler. It is appropriately sized for a two-parameter read tool, though it could have spent one more clause on the alternative or parameter sourcing at no real cost.

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?

For a simple read tool with annotations and no output schema, the description covers what is returned, but with 0% schema coverage it should also explain where course_id/assignment_id come from and what happens on an unknown ID. It is adequate but leaves the two required parameters opaque.

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 schema provides only bare names and types. The description adds no meaning: it doesn't say course_id is the Canvas course identifier obtained from canvas_list_courses, nor clarify the assignment_id format (integer ID vs slug). Both required parameters remain semantically undocumented.

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 resource (one assignment) and what it returns ('full details... including the description as text'), which implicitly contrasts with the sibling canvas_list_assignments. It never names the sibling or explicitly says 'single assignment by ID', so differentiation is inferred rather than stated.

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?

The phrase 'of one assignment' hints that this is the single-item retrieval path versus listing, but there is no explicit when-to-use, no prerequisites (e.g. needing the course_id from canvas_list_courses first), and no named alternative such as canvas_list_assignments.

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