filter_collection

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

The description discloses the data provenance (duels.ink) and explains that Poorcana legality is derived from the Rarity column without external lookups. However, it does not mention side effects (e.g., whether it writes a new file or overwrites) or any other behavioral traits. With no annotations, this is a partial gap.

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 concise and well-structured: a one-sentence purpose, a brief note on data source, and a clear Args section. No wasted words; each sentence earns its place.

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 moderate complexity (2 params, output schema present), the description covers the core context: what it filters, input requirements, and format definitions. It could be more explicit about what the output is (e.g., a new CSV, a printed table), but the output schema likely covers return structure. Overall, reasonably complete.

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 0%, so the description carries the full burden. It explains csv_path as 'absolute path to an enriched Lorcana collection CSV' and enumerates all format values with their string literals, adding meaning well beyond the bare schema.

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 filters an enriched collection CSV to cards legal in a specific play format, using a specific verb+resource+scope. This distinguishes it from sibling tools like search_cards, build_deck, or enrich_csv, which have different purposes.

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 the tool requires an 'enriched collection CSV' (a precondition) and lists the supported formats, but it does not explicitly state when to use this tool versus alternatives or provide exclusions. Usage guidance is present but not fully explicit.

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