mdl_reviews_check_already_wrote

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true, idempotentHint=true and destructiveHint=false, so the safety profile is covered. The description adds one genuinely useful behavioral fact: it requires host-configured MyDramaList authentication, which is not expressed anywhere in the structured fields.

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 and front-loaded, but the phrasing is cryptic and malformed ('check already wrote', stray spacing), so brevity comes at the cost of intelligibility rather than earning its place.

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 single-parameter query tool with no output schema, the description omits the parameter's meaning and says nothing about the return value (presumably a boolean or existing-review payload). Only the authentication requirement is covered, leaving key call-time information missing.

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% and the description never mentions title_id or its accepted forms (integer ID or slug-like string). The parameter's meaning is only weakly inferable from the tool name, so the description fails to compensate for the coverage gap.

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 'Reviews: check already wrote' essentially restates the tool name rather than stating a specific verb+resource in readable form. It is barely interpretable as 'check whether the authenticated user already wrote a review,' and it does nothing to distinguish itself from siblings like mdl_reviews_get or mdl_reviews_submit.

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 when-to-use guidance and no mention of alternatives. The agent is left to infer that this is a pre-check before mdl_reviews_submit, but that relationship is never stated.

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