classroom_find_assessment

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

With no annotations, the description discloses output behavior: returns due-date evidence, submission requirements, attachments, and extracted PDF/Google Doc text. It implies a read-only operation, though it does not explicitly state non-destructive or authentication needs.

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?

Two well-structured sentences: first defines the action and output, second provides a typical use case. No extraneous information.

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?

Describes outputs (due-date evidence, attachments, extracted text) but does not specify return structure, error handling, or what happens if no assessment is found. Given no output schema, more detail on return format would be beneficial.

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 only 40% (2 of 5 parameters have descriptions). The description does not add meaning to any parameters beyond what the schema provides, failing to compensate for the low 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?

Description clearly states the tool finds assessment tasks across Classwork and Stream posts, expanding matching items and returning detailed evidence. It uses specific verb 'find' and resource 'assessment task', and distinguishes from siblings like 'classroom_search_classwork' by focusing on assessments and returning extracted text.

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?

Provides a concrete usage example: 'Use this for questions like 'when is task X due and what do I submit?''. This gives context but does not explicitly state when not to use or mention alternatives among sibling tools.

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