scryfall_card_details

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true, idempotentHint=true, and openWorldHint=true, covering safety and behavior. The description adds 'full details' but does not disclose additional behaviors like error handling, rate limits, or result variability beyond what annotations imply.

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?

Single sentence front-loading the core action ('Get full details for a Magic card'). No unnecessary words, structure is optimal for quick scanning.

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 has 3 parameters and no output schema. The description ignores what 'full details' includes, error behavior (e.g., card not found, multiple fuzzy matches), and output structure. Given the openWorldHint, more context would help the agent anticipate variability.

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 adds no new semantic meaning beyond what the schema already provides (name, fuzzy, response_format). It merely summarizes the matching behavior.

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 states a specific verb ('Get'), resource ('full details for a Magic card'), and method ('by exact or fuzzy name'), clearly distinguishing it from sibling tools like scryfall_search_cards which returns lists.

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?

No guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives (e.g., scryfall_search_cards for lists, scryfall_card_rulings for rulings, scryfall_card_price for prices). The description implies use when you have a card name but does not provide exclusions or context.

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