get_public_document_card

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 action without disclosing behavioral traits such as side effects, authentication requirements, or error conditions (e.g., what happens if the document is not publicly shared). The read-only nature is implied but not explicit.

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 efficiently communicates the tool's purpose without extraneous words.

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?

The tool has a nested input schema, no output schema, and no annotations. The description does not explain what a 'card' is in this context, how to obtain the UUID or card_id, or what the return format is. It lacks sufficient detail for an agent to fully understand the tool's usage and expectations.

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 includes descriptions for both uuid and card_id, so the tool description adds little beyond the context of 'publicly shared document'. However, the description does not explicitly explain the role of card_id (e.g., whether it's the card's ID or a number within the document). Given the schema's coverage, the description provides minimal additional value.

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 'Get a card from a publicly shared document by UUID in Metabase' clearly specifies the action (get), resource (card), and context (publicly shared document by UUID). It distinguishes itself from siblings like get_public_card and get_public_document, which serve different purposes.

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 does not provide any guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives such as get_public_card or get_public_document. No explicit conditions, prerequisites, or when-not-to-use instructions are given.

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