update_assignment

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure, but it only repeats the meaning of the verb 'Update'. It does not state whether updates are partial or full replacements, whether unspecified fields are preserved, what happens if the assignment does not exist, or any permission/error implications.

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 filler words. It front-loads the action and resource and is easy to scan, which aligns well with the conciseness and structure criterion.

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 mutating tool with no annotations, no output schema, and seven parameters, the description is too sparse to be fully contextual. It omits update semantics, return value expectations, and failure behavior; the schema covers parameters but not the behavioral context needed for safe invocation.

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?

All seven parameters have descriptions in the input schema, so the schema already carries the parameter meaning. The description adds no parameter-level detail, but the 100% schema coverage justifies the baseline score of 3.

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 (Update) and the resource (an existing assignment in a Canvas course), making its core purpose immediately understandable. The word 'existing' helps distinguish it from create_assignment, though it does not detail the specific updatable attributes beyond what the schema shows.

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 implies when to use the tool: an assignment already exists and needs modification. However, it provides no explicit guidance about when not to use it, no mention of alternatives like create_assignment or get_assignment, and no prerequisites or preconditions.

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