get_device_last_used

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true and openWorldHint=true, so the safety profile is covered. The description contributes one piece of real context — that this resolves a missing deviceId for pushWorkoutToDevice — but says nothing about what 'last used' means, what is returned, or any failure behavior.

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?

It is short, but it is a sentence fragment with no front-loaded verb or resource, and it spends its only clause on internal plumbing rather than on orienting the caller.

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?

Zero params and no output schema keep the bar low, but with only one clarifying clause the definition leaves an agent unable to predict what this returns or how it differs from the many get_device* siblings. It is inadequate for correct tool selection.

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?

The tool takes zero parameters, so the schema baseline of 4 applies. The description correctly implies no arguments (the deviceId is resolved internally), which is consistent with the empty schema.

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 text is not a purpose statement at all; it is an aside noting that the tool is used internally by pushWorkoutToDevice. An agent learns nothing explicit about what get_device_last_used itself retrieves (a device object? an id? a timestamp?), so purpose must be guessed from the name alone.

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?

There is no direct when-to-use guidance. The mention of pushWorkoutToDevice hints at an internal consumer, but it neither tells the agent when to call this tool directly nor when to prefer the sibling get_devices or get_primary_training_device.

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