get_rubric_assessment

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

The readOnlyHint annotation already indicates a read operation, and the description's 'Get' is consistent. However, it does not add behavioral context beyond that, such as permission requirements or the structure of returned data, which would be useful given the lack of an output schema.

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 concise sentence that immediately communicates the tool's purpose. It contains no unnecessary words or repetition, making it highly efficient.

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?

The description is adequate for a simple getter, but it does not explain the return structure or any nuances like whether it returns scores for all criteria or an overall score. Since there is no output schema, this lack of detail leaves some gaps, though the purpose is sufficiently clear for a basic use case.

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% as each parameter has a description in the schema. The tool description does not add any extra meaning beyond what the schema provides, so baseline 3 is appropriate.

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's action: 'Get rubric assessment scores for a specific submission.' It uses a specific verb (get), resource (rubric assessment scores), and scope (specific submission), which distinguishes it from sibling tools like get_rubric (rubric definition) and grade_with_rubric (grading).

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 when needing rubric scores for a specific submission but does not explicitly state when to use it versus alternatives like get_rubric or list_rubrics. No exclusions or alternatives are mentioned, so guidance is only implied.

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