search_cards

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

No annotations exist, so the description must carry the burden of behavioral transparency. It only states the basic function and mentions Scryfall syntax, but does not disclose whether the operation is read-only, any rate limits, pagination, or side effects. This is minimal disclosure for a search tool.

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 a single sentence that is concise and front-loads the purpose. Every word is necessary; no fluff. Excellent structure for a summary.

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 tool has only two parameters with full schema descriptions and no output schema, the description covers the basic purpose. However, it lacks information about return format or pagination. It is minimally complete but leaves some context gaps.

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%, and the parameter descriptions in the schema are very detailed (e.g., query lists many Scryfall prefixes and operators). The tool description adds only a brief summary ('by name, type, or other criteria') which does not significantly enhance understanding beyond the schema. Baseline 3 applies.

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's purpose: 'Search for Magic: The Gathering cards by name, type, or other criteria'. The verb 'Search' and resource 'Magic: The Gathering cards' are specific. It distinguishes from siblings (get_card_details, get_random_card, get_set_info) by implying general search capability.

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 the tool is for searching by various criteria, but does not explicitly state when to use this tool versus siblings (e.g., use get_card_details for a specific card, get_random_card for random). No exclusions or prerequisites are mentioned.

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