Business cards PDF

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

Annotations already cover read-only, idempotent and closed-world status, but the description adds real value: the exact sheet layout (10 per sheet, A4/Letter), the mirrored back page for long-edge duplex, and the fact that vCard text is also returned. The Latin-only limitation is a disclosed behavioral constraint. Missing only return-format details like file names.

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?

Front-loaded with the core outcome and packed densely with useful specifics; every clause carries information. Slightly run-on and comma-chained, but no filler sentences.

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 22-parameter generator with no output schema, the description covers the output artifact, duplex behavior, print scaling, content limitations and the vCard return value. The output-path default lives in the schema rather than the description, 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?

Schema coverage is 82%, so the schema already carries most parameter meaning. The description enumerates the same option families (four templates, back variants, six themes, QR on front) without adding syntax or defaults beyond the schema, so baseline 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?

Specific verb+resource: design business cards and produce a print-ready PDF sheet. Names concrete output artifacts (crop marks, mirrored duplex back page, vCard text) that make it unmistakable next to doc_labels, doc_resume or doc_invoice.

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?

Gives practical usage context (print at 100% / actual size, Latin text only for now, web version link for the Arabic case) and an implicit constraint on scope. It doesn't explicitly name a sibling tool or state when NOT to use it, so not a 5.

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