add_anki_note

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries full burden. As a mutation tool adding notes, it doesn't disclose what happens on success/failure, whether duplicates are allowed, deck creation behavior, or Anki connectivity requirements. Very little behavioral context beyond the bare operation.

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 compact and front-loaded with the core purpose in the first line. The parameter list uses a clean :param format. One could argue it's slightly over-formatted with whitespace, but it's reasonably efficient.

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?

This is a mutation tool with no annotations and no output schema. With 0% schema description coverage, the tool relies entirely on this description, which lacks important details: error handling, duplicate behavior, tag format requirements, and return value. Incomplete for a tool with 4 parameters including a complex array type.

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%, so description must compensate. It lists parameters (deck, front, back, tags) but only with terse one-liners that essentially restate the parameter names without adding meaning. No examples, no format requirements for tags or deck names, no size limits for front/back content.

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 states it 'Adds a SINGLE Anki note' with a specific verb+resource. It distinguishes from the sibling add_multiple_anki_notes by emphasizing 'SINGLE' and 'Use this for adding one card at a time,' though it doesn't explicitly name the sibling.

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 usage context ('one card at a time') which provides implicit distinction from the multi-add sibling. However, it doesn't explicitly say when NOT to use this tool or name the alternative tool add_multiple_anki_notes directly.

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