color_identity_staples

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

Annotations already indicate readOnlyHint and idempotentHint. The description adds valuable context about data sourcing (EDHREC aggregated data fallback to bulk data) which provides transparency on behavior beyond annotations.

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 extremely concise with two sentences. The first sentence promptly communicates the tool's core purpose, and the second provides a necessary detail on data fallback. No extraneous information.

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?

The description is adequate given the schema and annotations, but it lacks information about the output format or return structure. For a tool with no output schema, explanation of what the response contains (e.g., list of cards, stats) would improve completeness.

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 input schema has 100% description coverage for all 4 parameters. The description does not add significant meaning beyond what the schema already provides, so 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 'Top cards across ALL commanders in a color identity' which specifies the verb (retrieve top cards), resource (color identity), and scope (all commanders). It distinguishes from sibling tools like 'tribal_staples' by focusing on color identity rather than tribe.

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 mentions data source fallback behavior but does not provide explicit guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives like 'tribal_staples' or 'goldfish_format_staples'. Usage context is implied but not explicitly stated.

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