tcg_collection_attach_pricing

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

The description discloses the effect (enabling live market value computation) beyond annotations. Annotations indicate idempotent and non-destructive, which aligns with 'map' action. The description adds context about future snapshot calls, which is useful.

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 two sentences, front-loaded with the core purpose, and contains no unnecessary words. Every sentence adds value.

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 the complexity (a mapping operation) and presence of an output schema, the description adequately explains the tool's role and post-condition. It could mention prerequisites (e.g., card must exist), but this is 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 description adds no information about parameters; schema coverage is 0%. The schema itself provides descriptions for two of three parameters, but the description offers no additional meaning beyond what is in the schema.

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's purpose: 'Map an owned card to a pricing listing for live valuation.' It uses a specific verb-resource combination and distinguishes this tool from siblings by explaining the subsequent use of `tcg_pricing_snapshot` for valuation.

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 the tool is a prerequisite for valuation (via `tcg_pricing_snapshot`), but it does not explicitly state when to use it versus alternatives or provide exclusion criteria.

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