get_quiz_source_material

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries full burden for behavioral disclosure. It does not mention side effects, required permissions, rate limits, or whether the operation is read-only. The description only states the output, lacking transparency beyond basic function.

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 highly concise: one sentence for purpose followed by parameter explanations. No extraneous text, and the key information is front-loaded.

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?

Given the output schema exists and the tool has only three optional parameters, the description adequately covers the tool's purpose and parameter usage. However, it lacks usage guidance and some behavioral details, but remains generally complete for a straightforward retrieval tool.

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 is 0%, but the description adds some meaning: it explains 'relative_path' is an optional single file path, 'topic' is a search topic used when relative_path is not set, and 'num_excerpts' is the count. This adds value beyond the schema's titles and defaults, though more detail could be provided.

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 'Return labeled excerpts and instructions for generating practice Q&A,' which specifies the verb (return) and the resource (labeled excerpts and instructions). This distinguishes it from sibling tools like 'extract_key_terms' or 'get_study_chunks'.

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?

No guidance is provided on when to use this tool versus alternatives such as 'get_study_chunks' or 'search_documents'. The description does not include any contextual cues or exclusions.

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