List decks saved via finalize_deck, newest first, with name, format, saved_at, summary, .ydk path, and ydke URL; optionally filter by TCG Advanced or Genesys format.
Decks saved with finalize_deck, newest first: name, format, saved_at, summary, .ydk path, ydke URL.
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| format | No |
Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.
v0.1.0Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
Annotations already declare readOnlyHint and openWorldHint, and the description adds genuine value on top: result ordering (newest first) and the exact field set returned. It does not cover pagination, result limits, or whether the format parameter narrows the list, so it stops short of 5.
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?
A single compact sentence, front-loaded with the resource and provenance, followed by the return fields. Nothing is padded and every clause carries 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?
With no output schema, the description usefully enumerates returned fields, and annotations cover the safety profile. However, it omits the semantics of the format filter, pagination/limit behavior, and whether an empty result is possible, leaving gaps for a listing tool.
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?
The single 'format' parameter has 0% schema description coverage and enum values (tcg_advanced, genesys) that are never explained. The description's mention of 'format' refers to an output field, not the input filter, so it does not compensate for the schema gap and could even mislead about what the parameter does.
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?
Identifies the exact resource ('decks saved with finalize_deck') and its ordering ('newest first'), letting an agent distinguish it from siblings like finalize_deck or search_cards. The verb (list/retrieve) is only implied rather than stated, which keeps it just short of a 5.
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?
Usage is only implied through the reference to finalize_deck as the producer of these records, so an agent can infer 'call this to see what you saved'. There is no explicit when-to-use/when-not statement or named alternative, and the role of the format parameter as a filter is not clarified.
Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.