get_last_questionnaire_answers

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

The description adds context beyond the annotations by specifying scope ('current user') and recency ('most recent'). It doesn't contradict the readOnlyHint or idempotentHint. It could mention behavior when no prior answers exist, but given the output schema and simple nature, this isn't a critical gap.

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, concise sentence (about 14 words) that front-loads the verb 'Get' and directly communicates the resource and purpose. No wasted words.

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 simple read tool with one optional parameter, full schema coverage, and annotations indicating read-only/idempotent behavior. The description's clarity about the resource and use case, combined with the existing structured metadata, makes it complete for agent selection and invocation.

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?

The input schema fully describes the single parameter 'fields' with details about dot-path, omission behavior, and available values ('shortAnswer'). The description adds no parameter-specific information, but with 100% schema coverage, the baseline of 3 is appropriate.

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 ('Get') and resource ('current user's most recent RSVP questionnaire answers'), and adds a distinct use case ('prefill future RSVP questionnaires'). It differentiates from sibling tools like get_my_rsvps by specifying questionnaire answers rather than RSVP statuses.

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 provides context by noting the tool is 'used to prefill future RSVP questionnaires,' which implies when to use it. It doesn't explicitly mention alternatives or exclusions, but the intended use case is clear enough for an agent.

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