get_latest_review_id

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

With no annotations, the description must disclose behavioral traits. It states the return value and default, but does not mention error handling (e.g., if deck does not exist), permissions, or whether it is read-only. The description is minimal but not misleading.

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 a single sentence that conveys the core functionality with no wasted words. It is front-loaded and 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?

For a simple tool with one parameter and no schema descriptions, the description is incomplete: it omits how to identify the deck (name vs ID) and any edge cases. The output schema is present but not described. Overall, it meets minimal adequacy but leaves gaps.

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% for the single parameter 'deck'. The description does not clarify whether 'deck' expects a deck name or ID, nor does it provide format or constraints. The description adds little beyond the parameter name.

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 it returns the most recent review ID for a deck, with a fallback of 0 if none. The verb 'Return' and resource 'most recent review ID' are specific. It distinguishes from sibling tools like 'get_reviews_of_cards' which are for individual cards.

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 provided on when to use this tool versus alternatives. With many sibling tools related to reviews, explicit when-to-use or when-not-to-use would help. The description does not mention any exclusions or context.

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