suggest_cuts

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

Annotations already provide readOnly/ idempotent/ openWorld hints. Description adds value by explaining scoring factors (synergy, inclusion rate, combo membership) and fallback behavior, which is 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?

Description is very concise with three front-loaded sentences, each providing essential information without fluff.

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?

Adequately describes purpose and behavior, but lacks mention of output format or that response_format parameter controls verbosity. With no output schema, more detail on return values would be helpful.

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%, so baseline is 3. Description does not add significant parameter details beyond schema; it briefly ties num_cuts to the purpose, but schema already describes parameters adequately.

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 the tool identifies weakest cards to cut from a commander decklist, using a specific verb and resource. It differentiates from sibling tools like deck_analysis by focusing on cuts.

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?

Implied usage for cut suggestions, and mentions graceful degradation when backends fail, providing context. However, no explicit when-not-to-use or alternatives compared to siblings.

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