get_grades

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

Annotations already flag this as read-only, and the description adds useful behavior: only released items are returned, and the final grade appears only if it is released. It also names the included fields (points, weight, comments), giving the agent a clear expectation of response content without contradicting annotations.

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?

One compact sentence communicates scope, return content and a conditional ('if released'), with no filler. It front-loads the subject and avoids repeating annotations or schema details.

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 optional parameter, the description names what is returned (points, weight, comments) and the conditional final grade. The schema supplies the remaining default behavior (omit course → current semester), so nothing needed for correct invocation is missing.

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 for the single `course` parameter is 100%, with a clear description ('Course filter. Omit for all current-semester courses.'). The tool description adds no additional semantics about the parameter, 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?

The description clearly identifies the resource ('grades') and the return payload ('points, weight, comments', plus final grade if released), and the qualifier 'released' distinguishes it from assignment listings like get_assignments. It is not a 5 because 'per item' does not spell out which grade-item types are covered.

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 phrasing 'My released grades' implies the primary use case—viewing the caller's own visible grades—and the optional course filter is documented in the schema. However, the description never states when to use this over siblings such as get_assignments or get_quizzes, nor any exclusion criteria.

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