Turn In Assignment

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

It discloses that the tool mutates submission state, is not trivially reversible, and names the reclaim tool for undoing it. This adds meaningful context beyond the annotations, which only indicate readOnlyHint=false and idempotentHint=false.

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 compact and front-loads the core purpose, then adds state requirements, return info, and reversal guidance in a structured way. The Args list is somewhat redundant with the schema, but the overall length is appropriate.

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 provides the critical state precondition, the mutation behavior, and the reversal path, which are essential for correct use. Missing details like error behavior for invalid states or fuller parameter semantics leave minor gaps, but the tool is otherwise well-specified.

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 33%, with only submission_id having a description. The description merely lists param names and types but does not explain course_id or coursework_id beyond what the schema already shows, failing to compensate for the coverage gap.

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 action: turning in/submitting a student assignment submission, with the concrete analogy of clicking 'Turn in'. It names the required state (CREATED or NEW) and is distinct from sibling tools like listing or reclaiming submissions.

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 conveys when to use this tool: to submit work to the teacher, and only when state is CREATED or NEW. It also explicitly points to the reclaim sibling for reversing the action if allowed, giving useful guidance for choosing alternatives.

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