Get Cards

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint, idempotentHint, openWorldHint, and destructiveHint=false, so the safety profile is fully covered. The description adds nothing beyond that: no default result size, pagination behavior, or ordering/visibility semantics that the annotations cannot convey.

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?

It is short and front-loaded, but the first sentence merely repeats the name/title, and the second sentence is the only one carrying content. There is no waste in length, but also almost no information per sentence.

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?

For a five-parameter listing tool with no output schema, an agent still cannot tell what a card represents, whether nested properties are returned by default, or how results are ordered or truncated. The annotations cover safety, but the description leaves core operational context unexplained.

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%, with enum values and defaults documented for sortBy, cardType, and contactCardVisibility, so the schema carries parameter meaning. The description's generic "optional filters" adds no interpretation beyond it; 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?

"Get Cards" plus "Returns cards with optional filters" identifies a read/list operation on a 'cards' resource, but 'card' is never defined and nothing distinguishes this from list_contacts, list_deals, or list_contacts-adjacent siblings that likely return the same underlying records.

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 only hint is "optional filters," which just restates that the parameters are optional. There is no statement of when to prefer list_cards over search_contacts or list_deals, nor any prerequisite or scope note.

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