get_my_grades

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint, idempotentHint, and non-destructive, so safety is covered. The description adds the valuable context that grades come from Brightspace and are not the official record, which is a meaningful distinction. It does not contradict annotations and provides extra scope information.

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 concise sentences with zero redundancy. The core purpose is front-loaded, and the distinguishing note about the official study record is placed immediately after, making it efficient and clear.

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 tool with one parameter and no output schema, the description is nearly complete. It states what it does and how it differs from official grades. It doesn't explicitly say the grades are for the given course, but that is implied by the parameter and tool name. Minor gap, but adequate.

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%—the courseId parameter is documented as an 'Exact Brightspace numeric identifier from another tool.' The description adds no parameter-level information beyond what the schema already provides, so the baseline of 3 applies.

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 uses a specific verb ('Read') and resource ('current student's Brightspace grades'), and immediately distinguishes from the 'official study record'. This clearly separates it from sibling tools like get_official_grade and list_official_grades, making the purpose unambiguous.

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 signals that this tool returns Brightspace grades, which are 'separate from the official study record.' This implies when to use it instead of official-grade tools, though it does not explicitly name alternatives or state when not to use it. The context is sufficient for an agent to infer proper usage.

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