get_collection_items

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

The readOnlyHint annotation already communicates the safe read-only nature, and the description adds that the items are cards and dashboards. However, it does not disclose behavior such as pagination, sorting, or whether subcollections are included, though the output schema may cover return format.

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, front-loaded sentence that immediately states the action and resource, followed by concise use cases. No redundant information or filler.

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 simple one-parameter schema, output schema, and read-only annotation, the description provides adequate context by specifying item types and use cases. It could mention pagination or subcollection behavior, but the tool's simplicity keeps this from being a significant gap.

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 schema fully describes the only parameter (collection_id), so the description adds no new meaning beyond implying the collection context. With 100% schema coverage, the baseline of 3 is appropriate.

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 the tool retrieves all items (cards, dashboards) within a Metabase collection, using a specific verb and resource. This differentiates it from sibling tools like list_cards or list_dashboards, which operate at a broader scope.

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 provides clear use cases: exploring collection contents, organizing analytical assets, or understanding content structure. It does not explicitly name alternatives or exclusions, but it implies the tool is for collection-scoped retrieval, which is sufficient context.

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