create_card

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

No annotations provided, so description carries full burden. It states 'Create' (write operation) and lists required fields, but lacks details on permissions, side effects, idempotency, rate limits, or validation behavior. Returns the created object, but no error scenarios.

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?

Two clear sections (Args and Returns) with no extraneous text. Each sentence serves a purpose. Highly efficient and front-loaded.

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 6 parameters, 3 required, and no annotations, the description covers creation essentials but lacks behavioral context. Output schema exists (per context), so return description is sufficient. Could improve by noting that collection_id must exist, or that query must be valid SQL.

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 coverage is 0%, but description provides brief explanations for each parameter (e.g., 'SQL query for the card', 'Optional description'). This adds meaning beyond the raw schema, though details like query syntax or visualization object format are absent.

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?

Description clearly states 'Create a new question/card in Metabase' with specific verb 'Create' and resource 'card'. It distinguishes from siblings like 'create_mongodb_card' and 'add_card_to_dashboard' by focusing on standard SQL-based card creation.

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?

No guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives. For example, it doesn't specify that this tool is for SQL-based queries and that 'create_mongodb_card' should be used for MongoDB. Missing exclusions or context.

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