get_card_prices

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries full burden. It mentions 'current' prices but does not disclose whether data is real-time, cached, or from a specific source. It also does not specify behavior for missing cards or pricing errors.

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 single sentence that immediately conveys the tool's purpose. No unnecessary words or repetition, and it is front-loaded with the verb 'Get'.

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 lookup tool with two self-explanatory parameters and no output schema, the description is mostly complete. It could mention the return format or error cases, but the current version is adequate for an agent to understand its basic function.

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 clear parameter descriptions (e.g., set code example, numbering note). The description adds 'normal and foil prices' but does not enhance parameter meaning beyond what the schema provides. Baseline 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 the tool gets current normal and foil prices for a specific card printing, using a specific verb-resource structure. It distinguishes from sibling tools like get_card (which retrieves card details) and get_card_price_history (which gets historical prices).

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 implies usage for current prices but does not explicitly state when to use this tool versus alternatives like get_card_price_history or get_card_performance. No exclusions or prerequisites are mentioned, leaving the agent to infer context from sibling names.

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