List Quizzes

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

Annotations only give readOnlyHint=true; the description adds substantial behavioral context beyond that: which fields are returned (due/open/close dates, time limit, allowed attempts, points, submission state) and an explicit list of what the tool will NOT do. That negative capability statement is the kind of detail an agent needs and cannot get from the annotation or 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?

Value is front-loaded in the first line, and each subsequent sentence carries distinct information (scope exclusions, ID differences, alternative tool). Slightly long for a single-parameter list tool — the Classic/New Quizzes ID note could be tighter — but nothing is filler.

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?

With no output schema, the description usefully enumerates the returned fields, and it explains the Canvas quirk that New Quizzes surface as assignments. For a simple read-only list tool this covers everything an agent needs to call it and interpret results correctly.

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?

Only one parameter and schema coverage is 100%, so the schema already defines course_identifier as course code or Canvas ID. The description adds a mild scoping hint ('one of YOUR courses') but no syntax or format detail, so the baseline 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?

Specific verb (List) plus resource (quizzes) scoped to one of YOUR courses, and it explicitly states both quiz engines (Classic and New Quizzes) are covered. It also disambiguates ID semantics (quiz ID vs assignment ID), which an agent would otherwise guess wrong.

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 routes the agent: 'Use get_quiz_details for one quiz and your attempts,' naming the sibling and the condition that selects it. It also states negative scope — never opens a quiz, starts an attempt, or reads questions/answers — so the agent won't call it hoping for content.

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