get_assignment

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

Annotations already provide readOnlyHint=true and openWorldHint=true, covering the safety profile. The description adds useful return-content scope, but does not disclose authorization needs, error behavior, or other operational traits. With annotations present, this is adequate but not rich.

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, front-loaded sentence that packs the full return scope into a clear, colon-led list. There is zero filler and every word earns its place.

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 read-only getter with no output schema, the description gives a solid sense of the return payload, but the gap around assignmentId semantics leaves an agent uncertain how to call it correctly. It is adequate overall, with one clear missing piece.

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 50%: course is well described, but assignmentId has no schema description. The tool description does not explain assignmentId format, how to obtain it, or its semantics, so it fails to compensate for the undocumented parameter.

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 states a specific operation: retrieving one full assignment with a detailed set of contents (instructions, files/links, submissions, feedback, score). The phrase 'One assignment in full' clearly differentiates it from the sibling get_assignments, which presumably returns a list.

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?

Usage is implied by 'One assignment in full' – it is for detailed single-assignment retrieval – but the description never explicitly mentions when to prefer this over get_assignments or other alternatives, and offers no when-not guidance.

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