get_latest_pyexamine_result

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries full burden, but it only states 'most recent' without explaining return format, behavior when no result exists, or whether filters combine additively. It also does not clarify what pyExamineResult is or any read-only property.

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, concise Korean sentence that directly communicates the tool's purpose with no unnecessary words. It is front-loaded and minimally sized.

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 simple read tool with no output schema and no annotations, the description is adequate but sparse. It does not explain return shape or how to differentiate from get_pyexamine_result_by_commit, leaving some gaps for the agent to infer behavior.

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 three parameters (jobName, commitHash, teamProjectId) are fully described in the schema, so the description adds no extra semantics beyond the existence of filters. Baseline 3 applies because schema coverage is 100% and the description does not add further usage detail.

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 tool retrieves the most recent code-analysis result containing pyExamineResult, using a specific verb (조회한다) and resource. This distinguishes it from siblings like get_pyexamine_result_by_commit, which filters by commit, and from list-type tools.

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 it (when needing the latest pyExamineResult), but provides no explicit guidance on when to prefer it over similar siblings like get_code_analysis_results or get_pyexamine_result_by_commit, nor any exclusion criteria.

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