execute_card

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

No annotations exist, so the description carries the burden. It describes execution and return format but omits behavioral details like auth needs, rate limits, or side effects. For a read-only operation, this is minimally adequate.

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 well-structured docstring with title, args, and returns. Every sentence contributes value, is concise, and front-loads the key purpose.

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 output schema exists (as per context), the description adequately explains the return format (markdown table). It covers all parameters, defaults, and the execution behavior, making it complete for this tool.

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?

All three parameters (card_id, parameters, max_rows) are described with defaults and examples. Schema coverage is 0% but the description adds meaning beyond the schema, especially for the parameters JSON format and max_rows default.

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 executes a saved question (card) and returns results. It uses a specific verb-resource combination and distinguishes from siblings like execute_query (raw queries) and card CRUD tools.

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 arg details and defaults but lacks explicit guidance on when to use this vs alternatives (e.g., execute_query) and doesn't mention when not to use it. It implies usage for saved questions but could be more prescriptive.

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