Fetch one TOEFL Writing practice prompt

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint and openWorldHint, but the description adds that the tool 'Reads a stored row and runs no model,' which clarifies that no AI generation happens and the result is deterministic. This is useful context beyond the annotations, and it does not contradict them.

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?

The functional description is just two sentences, front-loading the main action and expected result. The trademark disclaimer is extra but legally necessary and does not bloat the description. Every sentence 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?

For a single-parameter fetch tool with no output schema, the description adequately conveys what the caller gets (the full scenario/discussion context) and that it is a read-only database lookup. Nothing vital is missing for correct invocation.

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?

The schema fully documents item_id, including its meaning ('The prompt id returned by list_practice_prompts') and constraints (minLength 1). The description adds no further parameter information, so the baseline 3 applies given the 100% schema coverage.

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?

The description clearly states the action ('Fetch a single Writing practice prompt by its id') and the resource, and specifies it includes the full scenario or discussion context. The use of 'single' and 'by its id' distinguishes it from sibling list_practice_prompts, and 'runs no model' contrasts with score_writing_response.

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 description implies usage: the caller needs an id to fetch a specific prompt, which is a clear precondition. However, it does not explicitly point to list_practice_prompts for obtaining the id, nor does it state when to prefer this over alternatives. The parameter description in the schema partially compensates, so this is not a complete miss.

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