Submit study session results

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=false, idempotentHint=true, and destructiveHint=false. The description adds contextual behavior by mentioning it 'Updates the SM-2 spaced-repetition schedule' and 'returns accuracy and duration stats', which are useful details beyond the annotations. No contradiction exists.

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?

Two sentences, action-first, no unnecessary words. Every sentence contributes meaning: completion action, schedule update, and return stats.

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 annotations covering safety and idempotency, and the description explaining the side effect (SM-2 update) and return value (accuracy/duration stats), the tool is sufficiently specified for correct invocation. The sibling list provides context that this tool pairs with create_study_session.

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 covers 50% of parameters, and the description compensates partially by adding the rule 'one result per reviewed card', which clarifies the expected structure of the results array. It does not detail each field beyond the schema, but the schema already handles most fields.

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 ('Complete a study session') and the specific resource ('study session'), distinguishing it from sibling tools like create_study_session by focusing on submission and schedule update. This is a specific verb+resource pairing.

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 after a study session is created and all cards reviewed ('one result per reviewed card'), and the sibling list includes create_study_session for context. However, it does not explicitly name alternatives or exclusions, so it lacks the explicit 'when not to use' guidance.

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