tcg_collection_list

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true, destructiveHint=false, idempotentHint=true. The description adds no behavioral context beyond what the schema provides, such as default status or pagination behavior. Minimal additional value.

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, concise sentence that front-loads the verb and resource. Every word carries meaning, and there is no redundant information.

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 read-only list tool with annotations, the description suffices in stating the basic purpose. However, it lacks usage guidance and parameter details, which are partially covered by the schema. Sibling tools exist that could cause confusion without further context.

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 0% (though subject_like has a description). The description mentions 'optional filters and pagination' but does not explain the filter parameters (status, grading_provider, subject_like) or pagination parameters (limit, offset), leaving the agent to rely solely on schema names.

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 lists cards in the local collection with optional filters and pagination. It uses a specific verb and resource, but does not explicitly differentiate from similar sibling tools like tcg_collection_search.

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?

No guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives. The description does not mention exclusions or context for when to use tcg_collection_list over tcg_collection_search or other list tools.

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