get_public_card_query_format

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

No annotations are provided, so the description must carry the full burden. It only states the basic operation without disclosing important behavioral traits like authentication requirements, whether the card must be public, rate limits, or error handling.

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 sentence that is direct and free of extraneous information. It is appropriately concise for the tool's purpose.

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 absence of an output schema and the existence of many similar sibling tools, the description could be more complete by clarifying preconditions (e.g., the card must be publicly shared) or differentiating from export_public_card_query_format. However, it minimally covers the essential purpose.

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%, meaning the top-level parameter 'input' lacks a description. The nested parameters (uuid, export_format) are described in the schema, but the tool description adds no additional meaning or context beyond what the schema already provides.

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 verb 'Get', the resource 'query results for a publicly shared card', and the specific aspect 'in a specific export format'. It distinguishes from siblings like get_public_card_query by adding the format parameter.

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 retrieving query results in a given export format but does not explicitly state when to use this tool over alternatives such as export_public_card_query_format or get_public_card_query. No when-not or alternative guidance is provided.

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