add_deck_card

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

With no annotations, the description fully discloses the behavioral traits: it increments quantity (not overwrites), creates row if absent, and requires an API key. This is sufficient for an AI agent to understand the tool's side effects.

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, zero waste. Every sentence provides essential information: what it does, behavior, alternatives, and requirements.

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 additive operation, the description covers purpose, guidelines, and requirements. Missing explicit return value mention, but not critical. Sibling references strengthen 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?

Schema description coverage is 100%, so baseline is 3. The description adds value by explaining the semantic of 'quantity' (incremented, not set) beyond the schema's 'How many to add.' No additional param info needed.

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's verb ('add'), resource ('card to a deck'), and behavioral nuance ('incrementing its quantity, creates the row if absent'). It effectively distinguishes itself from siblings 'set_deck_card_quantity' and 'remove_deck_card'.

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?

Explicitly tells when to use this tool vs siblings: 'Use set_deck_card_quantity to set an absolute quantity or remove_deck_card to delete a row.' Also mentions the required auth key 'IWMM_API_KEY'.

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