Read a card's preset (spend limits, rate limits, allowed categories/merchants, time windows, and surfaces) as a plain-English summary. A card without a preset is unrestricted.
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| card_id | Yes | The card id (from list_cards). |
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| cardId | No | ||
| preset | No | Preset summary, or null when unrestricted. | |
| message | Yes |
Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.
Input schema / properties / card_id / descriptionPrevious value: -"The card id (from list_cards). Omit to read the account default preset (or for_app's, if set)."New value: +"The card id (from list_cards)."Input schema / properties / for_appRemoved value: -{
- "description": "Read a specific app's standing preset instead of the account default: \"cli\" for the CLI, a connected app's name, or its client id. Ignored when card_id is set.",
- "type": "string"
-}Input schema / requiredPrevious value: -[]New value: +[
+ "card_id"
+]Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
With no annotations provided, the description carries the burden of behavioral disclosure. It conveys that the operation is read-only via 'Read', discloses the output format ('plain-English summary'), and adds a valuable edge case: a card without a preset is unrestricted. It does not discuss errors or auth, but this is not a major gap for a read operation.
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 two tight sentences with no filler. The core purpose is front-loaded, and the important 'unrestricted edge case is delivered in a single clause.
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?
The tool is simple: one required parameter, an output schema present, and a description that clarifies behavior, return type, and the no-preset case. Nothing needed for correct invocation is missing.
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%, with card_id fully described as 'The card id (from list_cards)', so the schema already does the heavy lifting. The description adds no card_id-specific meaning beyond tying it to the preset concept, which is sufficient; baseline 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 uses a specific verb ('Read') and resource ('a card's preset'), enumerates exactly what the preset covers (spend limits, rate limits, allowed categories/merchants, time windows, surfaces), and clarifies the output form ('plain-English summary'). This clearly distinguishes it from sibling tools like list_presets or set_card_preset.
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 makes the usage context clear: use this to read a specific card's preset and understand whether it is restricted or unrestricted. It does not explicitly list when not to use it or name alternatives like list_presets, but the singular 'a card's preset' makes the intended selection unambiguous.
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.