RWS — Missing Info Card

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true and idempotentHint=true, so the description's phrase 'single card to surface hidden information' adds mild behavioral context without contradicting annotations. But it does not elaborate on what 'surface hidden information' means operationally.

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 extremely concise: two sentences plus an example and a group tag. It is front-loaded with the main purpose and wastes no words.

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 tool with a free-form JSON body parameter and no output schema, the description is incomplete. It lacks specification of required fields, field meanings, return format, and any constraints. The example helps but does not provide full context.

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 input schema has 100% description coverage, but the body parameter description only says to see the example. The description provides an example with fields (seed, question, allowReversed) but does not explain their semantics or whether they are all required.

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 it draws a single card to surface hidden information, with a specific verb and resource. However, it does not explicitly differentiate from other single-card tarot tools like tarot_rider_waite_draw_single, which could overlap in purpose.

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 provides no guidance on when to use this tool versus the many sibling tarot tools (e.g., advice, clarify, shadow_card). It lacks any situational context or exclusions.

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