list_set_cards

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden. It fails to disclose behavioral traits such as read-only status, authentication requirements, rate limits, or side effects. Only a basic 'list' operation is implied, which is insufficient for a tool with 7 parameters.

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 consists of two short, front-loaded sentences. The first sentence states the core action and pagination, the second adds filter info. No extraneous words or redundancy.

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 7 parameters, no output schema, and moderate complexity, the description provides the essential purpose and filter hints but lacks details on return value structure, authentication, or pagination behavior. It is adequate for basic understanding but leaves gaps for an agent to fully invoke the tool correctly.

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 schema description coverage is only 14% (only 'code' is documented). The description partially compensates by noting that rarity, type, format, and legality are filters 'the same as search_cards', adding context. However, page and limit parameters remain unexplained, and no details are given for filter values (e.g., format values are not enumerated).

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 lists all cards in a set, with pagination and filters. The name and description align, and it differentiates from sibling tools like get_card (single card) and search_cards (global search) by specifying the resource as cards in a set.

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 listing cards in a specific set with optional filters, but it does not explicitly distinguish when to use this tool versus the sibling 'search_cards' for cross-set searches. No explicit when-not or alternative guidance is provided.

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