reading_card_collection

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true, so the description's mention of 'browse' is consistent. It adds that pagination is used and images are not opened, but no further behavioral detail beyond what annotations imply.

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?

Single sentence, no extra words, front-loaded with purpose. Efficient and clear.

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?

No output schema, yet description does not describe what the response contains (e.g., list of card summaries, pagination metadata). Also fails to explain the bookId parameter. Incomplete for a tool with 3 parameters and no output schema.

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% and description provides no explanation for any of the three parameters (limit, bookId, offset). Even the word 'paginated' hints at limit/offset but does not define them or their defaults.

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 states the tool browses collected reading cards as a paginated collection without opening images. It clearly indicates listing over viewing individual cards, but it could more explicitly distinguish from reading_list_cards which may be a broader list.

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 siblings like reading_list_cards, reading_card_inbox, or reading_open_card. No when-not-to-use or alternative suggestions.

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