anki_add_notes

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries full burden. It states the tool adds cards, implying a write operation, but lacks critical behavioral details: whether it requires authentication, how it handles duplicates or errors, if it's idempotent, or what the response format is. This is a significant gap for a mutation tool.

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, efficient sentence with zero waste. It's front-loaded and appropriately sized for the tool's complexity, making it easy to parse quickly.

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?

Given the tool's complexity (a write operation with 2 parameters, no annotations, and no output schema), the description is incomplete. It lacks behavioral context, error handling details, and guidance on usage versus siblings, leaving the agent with insufficient information for reliable 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?

Schema description coverage is 50% (only 'deckName' has a description). The description adds minimal value beyond the schema, as 'Add multiple flashcards' hints at the 'cards' array but doesn't explain its structure or semantics. With partial schema coverage, the description doesn't adequately compensate for undocumented parameters.

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 ('Add multiple flashcards') and resource ('to an Anki deck'), distinguishing it from the sibling 'anki_add_note' (singular vs. multiple). However, it doesn't specify what constitutes a 'flashcard' beyond the schema's front/back structure, leaving some ambiguity.

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 explicit guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives is provided. The description implies bulk addition, but it doesn't clarify prerequisites (e.g., deck must exist), when to use 'anki_add_note' for single cards, or how it relates to 'anki_create_deck'.

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