list_decks

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

The description gives zero behavioral information. Without annotations, the agent has no clue about side effects, read/write nature, or permissions. 'Local study app tool' reveals nothing about what happens when the tool is invoked.

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?

While the description is short (5 words), it fails to convey the tool's function. It is under-specified rather than concise; every word is wasted on vague domain context instead of actionable behavior.

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 has no parameters, no annotations, no output schema, and many siblings, the description is critically incomplete. It does not even mention that the tool lists decks, making it nearly useless for an AI agent.

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 is empty and schema described coverage is 100% (no parameters to describe). The description adds no meaning, but per guidelines, baseline is 3 when coverage is high. No additional value provided.

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 'Local study app tool' is extremely vague. It does not specify that the tool lists decks, nor does it distinguish it from siblings like get_deck, create_deck, or open_study_app. The verb and resource are missing, making the purpose unclear.

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. There is no mention of context, prerequisites, or exclusions, leaving the agent without direction for selection.

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