bulk_format_staples

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

Annotations already provide readOnlyHint, openWorldHint, and idempotentHint. The description adds valuable behavioral context about how ranking adapts (EDHREC, MTGGoldfish, manaefficiency heuristic), which goes beyond annotations. No contradictions.

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 extremely concise: two sentences front-loaded with the primary purpose, followed by necessary behavioral detail. No wasted words.

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 6 parameters, no output schema, and sibling tools that may return different formats, the description lacks an explanation of the return structure (e.g., fields, sorting). It adequately covers ranking logic but not what the output contains.

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. The description does not provide additional parameter meaning beyond what the schema already offers (e.g., ranking_mode behavior is explained in schema property description). No extra value.

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 finds 'most popular (staple) cards legal in a format', with a specific verb and resource. It distinguishes itself by explaining adaptive ranking logic based on format type, which differentiates it from sibling tools like 'edhrec_commander_staples' or 'goldfish_format_staples'.

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 explicitly explains when to use this tool (finding staples for a format) and how ranking adapts (singleton vs competitive formats). It implies its niche among sibling staple tools but does not explicitly state when not to use it or list alternatives.

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