ezd_api3_get_last_case_changes

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

The annotations declare readOnlyHint=true and the description is consistent with that, but the description adds almost no behavioral detail. It does not disclose what counts as a 'change', result limits, pagination, ordering, or default time window.

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 two concise sentences with no filler, and the core action is front-loaded. Every phrase contributes to understanding the 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?

There is no output schema, yet the description never explains what the returned changes look like or how 'last' is determined. An agent cannot confidently predict the result shape or understand default behavior when no filters are provided.

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 100%, so all six optional parameters are already documented in the input schema. The description adds that date, IdPisma, and CID act as filters, but it does not clarify whether these filters combine or are mutually exclusive, adding only marginal value.

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 uses a specific verb ('Pobierz') and a specific resource ('ostatnie zmiany w sprawach z EZD PUW'), making the tool's purpose clear. It is distinct from sibling tools like ezd_api3_get_case or ezd_api3_list_cases, though it does not explicitly name an alternative.

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 related case or change-focused siblings. The description lists filter options but provides no context, exclusions, or alternative recommendations.

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