list_embeddable_cards

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

No annotations are provided, so the description should compensate. It only states the tool lists embeddable cards and is admin-only, but lacks details on output format, pagination, or any side effects. For a read operation, minimal transparency is acceptable but falls short without annotations.

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 efficiently conveys the tool's purpose and a key constraint (admin only). No redundant 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?

For a simple listing tool with no output schema, the description is adequate but lacks details about the return format or how to interpret results. It does not differentiate from sibling tools like 'list_cards' beyond 'embeddable'. More context on what 'embeddable' means would help.

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 has one required parameter ('input' object) with no properties, effectively no parameters. With zero parameters, the baseline is 4, and the description adds no parameter information, which is acceptable since there are no meaningful parameters to describe.

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 all cards available for embedding, with the specific scope of 'admin only'. It distinguishes from sibling tools like 'list_cards' by focusing on embeddable cards.

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 mentions 'admin only' as a condition but provides no guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives like 'list_cards' or search tools. No when-not-to-use or alternative suggestions.

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