get_reflections

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint, idempotentHint, and destructiveHint, covering safety and idempotency. The description adds ordering (newest first) but does not disclose behavior like pagination limits or empty result handling. The bar is lower due to annotations, but description could add more value.

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 very short and to the point, but includes superfluous version info 'v3.1.0 M8' which may be irrelevant for an AI agent. It is efficient but could be streamlined.

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 presence of sibling tools like list_reflections and the lack of output schema, the description lacks sufficient detail to differentiate usage. It does not explain what reflections are or how top-K is determined, leaving gaps for an 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?

Schema description coverage is 0% and the description does not mention the parameter top_k. The parameter has a default of 5 in the schema, but the description fails to compensate with any explanation of its meaning or effect, leaving the agent to infer.

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 tool retrieves top-K most recent reflections, newest first. It identifies the resource (reflections) and ordering, distinguishing from siblings like list_reflections or reflect. However, it does not explain what reflections are, relying on domain knowledge.

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 no guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives like list_reflections. It does not mention when-not to use it or any prerequisites. Usage context is implied but not explicitly stated.

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