homey_get_flow_cards

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden. 'List' implies a safe read operation, which is transparent. But the description does not disclose any behavioral traits beyond that, such as whether results are paginated, sorted, or filtered by the optional type parameter. For a simple listing tool, this is minimally adequate but not rich.

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, concise sentence that immediately conveys the tool's function. It is front-loaded with the action 'List' and includes necessary qualifiers without any superfluous 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 simple tool with one optional parameter and no output schema, the description is complete enough. It explains what is listed (flow cards) and the scope (devices or system). It could optionally mention that the type parameter filters results, but that is already in the schema, so the description is sufficient.

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 only parameter 'type' is fully documented in the schema with an enum and description 'Filter by card type'. The tool description does not add any additional meaning beyond what the schema already provides, so the baseline score of 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 uses a specific verb 'List' and clearly identifies the resource as 'flow cards' with their categories (triggers, conditions, actions). It also scopes to 'devices or system', which distinguishes it from sibling tools like homey_list_flows that list flows, not individual cards.

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 context is clear: this tool lists flow cards, and the scope 'for devices or system' gives a sense of when to use it. However, it does not explicitly mention alternatives or exclusions, such as using homey_get_flow for a specific flow's details or homey_list_flows for the complete flow list. Still, the purpose is clear enough to differentiate.

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