get_card_prices

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

Annotations already indicate readOnlyHint=true, so the safety is known. The description adds that it retrieves 'current normal and foil prices', which is useful but does not disclose other behavioral traits (e.g., whether both prices are always returned, if prices can be null, or rate limits).

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 of 11 words, no fluff. It communicates the essential purpose efficiently.

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 read-only tool with only 2 well-documented parameters and no output schema, the description is complete. It tells the agent exactly what it does and what inputs are needed.

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?

The input schema has 100% coverage with detailed descriptions of setCode and setNumber. The description adds no additional parameter information beyond what the schema provides, so 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 verb 'get' and the resource 'current normal and foil prices for a specific card printing'. It distinguishes itself from sibling tools like 'get_card_price_history' (which returns historical data) and 'get_card_buylist' (which returns buylist prices), making it unambiguous.

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 does not explicitly state when to use this tool versus alternatives like 'get_card_price_history' or 'get_card'. The purpose is implied by the name and description, but no direct guidance on exclusion or context is provided.

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