list_decks

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

With no annotations, the description must carry the behavioral disclosure burden. 'List' clearly implies a read-only operation, and the specified fields indicate what is returned. However, it does not disclose details such as ordering, potential pagination, or whether all stored decks are always included, leaving some behavioral aspects implicit.

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 states the action, the target, and the key attributes. Every word contributes meaning; there is no redundant or filler content.

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's simplicity (zero parameters) and the presence of an output schema, the description adequately covers the essential context. It could mention that it lists all decks without filters, but for a straightforward list operation the current description is sufficiently complete.

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 tool has zero parameters, and the schema coverage is 100% (empty properties). The description adds no parameter semantics, but none are needed. The baseline for 0 parameters is 4, and the description does not obstruct or complicate parameter understanding.

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') with a clear resource ('stored decks') and enumerates the included attributes ('format, best_of, tier and source'). This clearly distinguishes it from sibling tools like 'search_cards' or 'owned_cards', which target different resources.

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 implies usage when you need to see stored decks, but it does not explicitly state when to prefer this tool over alternatives like 'collection_summary' or 'query_sql'. There is no mention of exclusions or context, but the simple listing purpose is reasonably inferred.

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