search_cardsFull-text search over the MyCardfolio sports card database. Searches player/subject names, card numbers, products, sets, and card details. Optionally filter by sport and year.
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| year | No | Year filter, e.g. "1989" | |
| limit | No | Max results (default 20, max 50) | |
| query | Yes | Search terms, e.g. "griffey upper deck" | |
| sport | No | Sport/category filter, e.g. "baseball" |
Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
No annotations provided, so description carries full burden. Only states it performs search without disclosing behavioral traits like read-only nature, rate limits, or response structure. Minimal transparency beyond basic function.
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?
Two sentences with no redundant information. Efficiently conveys purpose and optional parameters.
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 search tool with 4 parameters and no output schema, description adequately covers what the tool does and optional filters. Could mention default limit (20) or result format, but not critical.
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 100%, so baseline is 3. Description adds context by summarizing searched fields and filters, but does not significantly enhance understanding beyond schema descriptions.
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?
Clearly states verb (search), resource (sports card database), and scope (player/subject names, card numbers, etc.). Distinguishes from siblings like get_card or identify_card by being a broad full-text search.
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?
Describes optional filters (sport, year) but lacks explicit when-to-use or when-not-to-use guidance compared to sibling tools. No mention of alternatives or prerequisites.
Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.
Add one secure layer between your agents and this server.
All seven tools have clearly distinct purposes: browse for hierarchy navigation, card_of_the_day for a daily feature, find_variants for parallel cards, get_card for single card detail, get_set_checklist for set checklists, identify_card for free-text parsing, and search_cards for full-text search. There is no overlap or ambiguity.
Most tool names follow a verb_noun pattern (browse, find_variants, get_card, get_set_checklist, identify_card, search_cards). The exception is card_of_the_day, which is a noun phrase, but it is a singular feature and does not disrupt overall consistency significantly.
With seven tools, the server is well-scoped for a sports card database. Each tool serves a distinct query need: navigation, search, identification, detail retrieval, and variant discovery. The count is neither too few nor too many.
The tool set covers the core read-only operations needed for a card database: browsing, searching, identifying, getting details, and listing sets. Minor gaps exist, such as lacking cross-set comparison or advanced filtering by product, but the overall surface is comprehensive for typical use.