spellbook_find_combos

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

Annotations readOnlyHint, idempotentHint, openWorldHint indicate safe read and volatility. Description adds that it 'Returns up to `limit` combos with cards involved and results produced', providing output structure. No contradictions. Additional context like rate limits or auth not needed given 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?

Two sentences, front-loaded with purpose. No unnecessary words. Efficiently conveys purpose, optional filtering, and output structure.

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?

For a simple search tool with good annotations and thorough schema coverage, the description is adequate. It mentions output includes cards and results, sufficient for an agent. No output schema exists, but the description compensates. Could add more detail on combo format, but not essential.

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 100% with descriptions for all three parameters. Description adds value by providing examples for color_identity ('sultai', 'BUG', 'wubrg') and clarifying that limit controls max combos returned. This enhances understanding beyond the schema.

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 'Search for known combos involving a specific card.' This is a specific verb-resource pair. Sibling tools include spellbook_find_decklist_combos (combos in a decklist) and spellbook_combo_details (details of a specific combo), making this tool's purpose distinct.

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 explicit guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives. The description implies usage when searching combos by card, but does not mention when not to use it or point to sibling tools like spellbook_combo_details or spellbook_find_decklist_combos. The context is clear but lacks exclusions.

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