Get full card details

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full burden. It discloses the return contents (full text, image URL, prices) and the two identification modes, but doesn't mention error behavior, rate limits, or what happens if both id and name are provided. It's adequate but not rich.

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, immediately front-loaded with the core action. Every clause earns its place—the first sentence states what it does, the second how to identify the card. No wasted words.

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?

Despite lacking an output schema, the description names the key return fields (text, image URL, prices). For a low-complexity single-card fetch, this is sufficient. It could be more complete with a note on not-found behavior, but that's a minor gap.

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 covers each parameter individually (100% coverage), so the baseline is 3. The description adds value by explaining the logical relationship: either id OR name+set, with examples. This goes beyond the schema's flat definitions.

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 opens with 'Fetch one card with full text, image URL and prices,' clearly stating the verb, resource, and scope. It distinguishes from siblings like search_cards by emphasizing 'one card' and requiring an exact identifier.

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?

Guidance is clear about needing either an id or an exact name plus optional set code, implying that partial/incomplete identifiers belong in search tools. However, it doesn't explicitly mention alternatives or exclusions like 'use search_cards instead when you don't have an exact name or id.'

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