get_card

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

No annotations are provided; the description indicates a read operation ('Get') but does not explicitly confirm it is non-destructive or mention any side effects, rate limits, or required permissions. For a simple read tool, this is adequate but not exemplary.

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, concise sentence that immediately conveys the core function. It is well-structured and readable, though it could be slightly expanded for clarity.

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 an output schema and a simple interface, the description provides sufficient context for an agent to understand what the tool returns. However, it lacks details on when to choose this over sibling tools.

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?

With 0% schema description coverage and only one parameter (card_id), the description adds no information about the parameter format, source, or constraints. The phrase 'with checklists, labels, and members' describes the return but not the input.

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 ('Get'), the resource ('a single card'), and what is included ('with checklists, labels, and members'), distinguishing it from siblings like list_cards which would return multiple cards.

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 implies usage when you need details for a specific card, but it provides no explicit guidance on when to use this vs alternatives like list_cards or update_card. No context on prerequisites or when not to use it.

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