Get card by set + collector number

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 discloses the main fetch behavior and the optional 'full' parameter to control return detail. However, it lacks details on error handling, authentication, or side effects, which is acceptable for a simple read-only tool but leaves some gaps.

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 main action. Every element is necessary and informative, without any 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?

Given no output schema, the description does not explicitly explain the return format or possible errors. It is sufficient for a simple fetch but leaves some completeness gaps, such as what 'full' means in terms of output structure.

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 description coverage is 100%, so baseline is 3. The description adds value by providing concrete examples for 'set' and 'collector_number', and explains the optional 'lang' and 'full' parameters, supplementing the schema descriptions.

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 'Fetch' and the resource 'single card' with specific parameters (set code and collector number). It distinguishes from siblings like get_card_by_id or get_card_named by the unique combination of set and collector number.

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 provides an example ('mh2' and '173') and mentions optional language code, giving clear context for when to use this tool. It does not explicitly mention alternative tools or when not to use it, but the use case is well-defined.

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