price_comparison

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint, openWorldHint, and idempotentHint. The description adds behavioral details: it uses Scryfall bulk data, returns a markdown table with specific price types and sorting. No contradictions with annotations.

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 sentences, front-loads the action and output, and contains no unnecessary words. Every sentence adds value.

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 schema and annotations, the description is adequate. It explains the output format (markdown table with currencies) which is missing from schema. No output schema exists, so the description compensates. Could mention caching or data freshness, 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% (both parameters described). The description does not add additional meaning beyond the schema regarding parameters. The response_format parameter is mentioned indirectly via output format, but no new semantic insight.

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 compares prices across multiple cards using Scryfall bulk data, and specifies the output format (markdown table with USD, USD foil, EUR prices sorted by USD descending). This distinguishes it from sibling tools like scryfall_card_price (single card price) and card_comparison (likely stat comparison).

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 indicates when to use (comparing prices across multiple cards) but does not explicitly mention when not to use or point to alternative tools. However, the purpose is clear and context is provided.

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