Retrieve the maximum case number for a specified GSA case type (L, A, or C). Use it to get the corresponding case ID from an Oasys GSA structural model.
Return highest case for case type L/A/C.
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| caseop | Yes |
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
No arguments | |||
Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.
v0.1.0Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full behavioral burden. 'Return' implies a read-only query, but there is no explicit statement about side effects, safety, permissions, or error handling, leaving behavioral traits undisclosed.
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?
A single sentence with zero waste, front-loading the verb and resource. Appropriate length for a simple query tool.
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?
With one required parameter, no schema description, and no annotations, the description should explain accepted values for 'caseop' and clarify what 'highest' means. These omissions leave the agent unable to invoke it correctly without external knowledge.
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 0%, so the description must define the single parameter. It mentions 'case type L/A/C' which may hint at allowed values, but never maps this to the 'caseop' parameter or explains the expected format.
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?
States a specific verb 'Return highest case' and resource 'case', which distinguishes it from siblings like gsa_highest_view. However, 'case type L/A/C' is an unexplained acronym that leaves the exact operation ambiguous for an agent without prior domain knowledge.
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 given on when to use this tool versus alternatives such as gsa_case_exist or gsa_highest_view. It also omits any prerequisites or context for selecting the correct tool.
Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.