classroom_search_activity

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

No annotations provided, so description must carry full burden. It describes actions like searching, expanding comments, and returning materials, implying read-only behavior. However, it does not explicitly state safety, authentication needs, or potential side effects, leaving some ambiguity.

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 description is a single paragraph that front-loads the main purpose and is reasonably concise, though slightly wordy. Every sentence adds value, but it could be tightened.

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?

No output schema is provided, so the description should explain return values. It vaguely states 'return related teacher-posted materials or assignments' but lacks specifics on result structure, pagination, or fields. For a tool with 7 parameters, it is partially complete but has gaps.

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 coverage is 57% (4 of 7 parameters described). The description adds context about the tool's overall purpose but does not significantly elaborate on individual parameters beyond what the schema provides. It mentions 'expand matching comment threads' relating to includeComments, but overall does not compensate for missing schema descriptions.

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 tool searches course Stream posts and Classwork, expands comment threads, and identifies teacher replies, with a specific use case. It distinguishes from sibling tool classroom_search_classwork by focusing on teacher replies and related materials.

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?

Explicitly states when to use: 'Use for questions about whether a teacher replied...' Provides clear context and a specific use case, but does not mention 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.