List Quizzes

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true, idempotentHint=true, destructiveHint=false, and openWorldHint=true, so the safety profile is covered. The description usefully adds that only IDs are returned (a lightweight result), but says nothing about ordering, pagination, or empty-result behavior for what may be a remote/open-world source.

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 no filler; the resource and its scoping constraint are stated immediately and nothing is repeated.

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-only list tool with no output schema, the description conveys the key return shape (an ID list) and the scope, while annotations carry the safety profile. Only secondary details like ordering or pagination are absent, which is a minor gap.

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%, so all three parameters are already documented, including the non-obvious 'account' label semantics. The description only restates the course/lecture scoping that the schema already conveys, adding no syntax or format detail beyond it.

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 (fetch) plus resource (quizzes) and narrows scope to a specific course lecture, and the 'id list' phrasing distinguishes it from detail-fetching siblings like get_quiz. It does not explicitly name any sibling, so an agent must infer the distinction from the resource noun alone.

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 scoping phrase 'in a specific course lecture' implies when this tool is relevant, but there is no explicit when-to-use or when-not-to-use guidance. Nothing tells the agent how to choose between this and get_quiz or list_quiz_responses.

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