tcg_psa_get_cert

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

Annotations already indicate readOnlyHint=true, destructiveHint=false, idempotentHint=true. The description adds behavioral context: it notes that population data is returned 'when PSA exposes them,' which informs the agent about potential variability in results. This goes beyond annotations without contradiction.

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 concise, consisting of two clear paragraphs. The primary action is stated in the first sentence, and the second paragraph lists returns efficiently. No redundant or unnecessary 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?

Given the tool's simplicity, the presence of an output schema, and clear annotations, the description covers all necessary context: what the tool does, what it returns, and an important caveat about data availability. No gaps.

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 provides descriptions for both parameters (cert_number and response_format). With schema description coverage effectively high (100% at the property level), the description adds no additional parameter semantics beyond what the schema provides. Baseline of 3 is appropriate.

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: 'Look up a single graded card by its PSA cert number.' It lists the returned data (card metadata, grade, population data), and the title from annotations reinforces this. It distinguishes from sibling tools like tcg_bgs_get_cert and tcg_cgc_get_cert by explicitly mentioning PSA.

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 PSA card lookups but does not explicitly state when to use this tool versus alternatives (e.g., for other grading companies) or provide any exclusion criteria. No guidance on when not to use it.

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