create_mongodb_card

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden. It explains the creation action and return value but does not disclose side effects, permissions, idempotency, or error conditions. The behavioral transparency is adequate but not thorough.

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 efficiently structured with Args/Returns sections, covering all parameters and return value in a concise manner without superfluous information. Every sentence adds value.

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 has 7 parameters and an output schema, the description covers the core purpose, parameters, and return value. However, it lacks details on error handling, prerequisites, or distinct use cases relative to sibling tools, leaving some gaps.

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?

With 0% schema description coverage, the description compensates by listing each parameter with a brief explanation (e.g., 'MongoDB query string (aggregation pipeline or query)'). The descriptions add meaning beyond the raw schema, though some could be more detailed (e.g., format of 'query').

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 'Create a new MongoDB question/card in Metabase,' specifying the verb (Create), resource (MongoDB question/card), and context (Metabase). This distinguishes it from sibling tools like 'create_card' which may target other databases.

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 for creating MongoDB cards but does not explicitly compare with alternatives like 'execute_mongodb_query' (run without saving) or 'create_card' (generic). No 'when not to use' guidance is provided.

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