Get Assignment Upload Slots

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden of disclosing behavior. It indicates a read operation ('list') but does not explicitly state read-only nature, authentication requirements, or any side effects. The behavioral disclosure is minimal.

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 sentence with no redundant words. It is efficiently structured to convey the main purpose. However, it could incorporate more information without losing conciseness.

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?

Despite having an output schema (reducing the need to explain return values), the description is too sparse. It fails to clarify how slots are identified, the meaning of 'upload_url', or the behavior when parameters are omitted. Given the tool has three optional parameters and no schema descriptions, the description should provide more context.

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 0%, and the description does not explain the meaning or usage of the three parameters (course, assignment, upload_url). The tool name implies they identify an assignment, but no detail is given on how to provide them or their relationships. This is completely inadequate for an agent to figure out how to populate the parameters.

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 'List' and identifies a clear resource 'file slots on an assignment's upload page'. It mentions the included information (filled status, allowed extensions), making the tool's purpose distinct from siblings. However, it does not explicitly differentiate from other tools like 'submit_assignment', so it is not a perfect 5.

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 provides no guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives. It does not mention prerequisites, context, or cases where another tool should be preferred. The agent has no information about when to choose this over siblings.

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