get_collections

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

Beyond the read-only/idempotent/destructive annotations, it adds non-obvious behavior: one page per call, a 7-day local cache, index pages limited to 1-4 live, and a personal/non-commercial use restriction. These are valuable operational constraints not derivable from structured fields.

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?

Three tight sentences, front-loaded with the core purpose, then mode behavior, then slug format and operational constraints. No filler; every clause conveys actionable information.

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?

Although no output schema exists, the description specifies what each mode returns (collection list vs. site cards), so the agent knows the shape of results. Combined with annotations and full schema coverage, nothing needed to invoke it correctly is missing.

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 description coverage is 100%, so both 'page' and 'slug' are already fully documented. The description's slug format examples and pagination note largely repeat the schema rather than extending it, so it earns only the baseline.

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?

States a specific verb (Browse) and resource (Awwwards' curated and member collections), and distinguishes its two operating modes: list without a slug vs. return a collection's first page of site cards with a slug. An agent can tell exactly what it returns.

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?

Clearly explains when each mode applies (slug present vs. absent) and gives concrete slug examples ('brutalism' for curated, 'owner/slug' for member). However, it never names a sibling alternative (e.g., search_sites, list_categories) or states when NOT to use this tool, leaving it just short of a 5.

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