Search shared decks

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

Annotations only declare readOnly/openWorld; the description adds substantial behavior beyond them: AnkiWeb returns all matches at once so sorting/paging happens client-side, no session is required, searches are rate-limited to ~4/minute, and repeated searches are cached for ten minutes. These are exactly the operational constraints an agent needs before calling.

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?

Three tight sentences: purpose first, then the paging rationale, then session/rate-limit/cache constraints. Nothing is redundant and the operational caveats are front-loaded where an agent will see them.

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?

An output schema exists so return values need no explanation, and the description covers purpose, auth needs, rate limits, caching, and the paging model. For a search tool of this complexity, nothing an agent needs to invoke it correctly is missing.

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 50%: query and sort carry descriptions, while page and limit have none. The description alludes to 'sorted and paged here' but adds no meaning to the page/limit semantics or the limit cap, so it only partially compensates for the undocumented half of the parameters. Baseline 3 fits.

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?

States a specific verb and resource scoped precisely: 'Search AnkiWeb's shared deck catalogue by title.' This clearly separates it from list_my_decks (the caller's own decks) and get_shared_deck (a single deck), so an agent can route without inspecting schemas.

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?

Implies usage context (searching the public catalogue rather than the user's own decks) and clarifies the prerequisite that no AnkiWeb session is needed. It stops short of naming alternatives like list_my_decks or get_shared_deck or stating exclusions, so it is clear but not explicit routing guidance.

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