get_card_templates

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the behavioral burden. 'Browse' implies a read-only operation and the occasion list clarifies accepted filter values, but it does not mention return format, pagination, or what happens when occasion is empty.

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, well-structured sentence that front-loads the core action and then adds the optional filter. There is no filler or redundant restating of the tool name.

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 simple read-only browse tool with one optional parameter, the description covers the essential invocation details: what it returns conceptually and which filter values are valid. It lacks return-shape details, but the tool is simple enough that this is a minor gap.

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 only declares an optional string with a default and no description, so schema coverage is effectively 0%. The description compensates by enumerating the valid occasion values and stating that filtering is optional, giving an agent the key semantic information.

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 ('Browse') and resource ('card catalog'), and the optional occasion filter adds precision. It distinguishes itself from siblings by resource domain, though it does not explicitly name an alternative.

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 when to use this tool: when browsing card templates, optionally narrowed by occasion. However, it provides no explicit when-not guidance or comparisons with siblings like send_card or get_offers.

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