Price check across printings

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries the burden of disclosing behavior. It reveals the data sources (Cardmarket/TCGplayer) and the highlight behavior, which is useful. However, it does not mention whether prices are live/cached, error handling for unknown cards, or that this is a read-only operation.

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, well-structured sentence that front-loads the core function (prices for every printing) and adds key details (markets and highlight). No redundant or filler content.

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 2-parameter tool with no output schema, the description provides a solid understanding of what the tool does and what to expect (multiple printings with prices, highlighted cheapest standard-playable). It could mention return format or pagination, but it is sufficiently complete for typical pricing lookups.

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 already fully documents both parameters with examples (name and set), so the description adds no additional parameter semantics. Since schema description coverage is 100%, the baseline of 3 applies.

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 provides Cardmarket (EUR) and TCGplayer (USD) prices for every printing of a card, with a specific highlight for the cheapest standard-playable version. This distinguishes it from sibling tools like get_card or search_cards, which likely focus on card data or search, not pricing.

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 pricing inquiries by mentioning the sources and scope, but it does not explicitly say when to use this tool over alternatives. No exclusions or alternative tool references are given, so the suitability must be inferred.

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