list_public_cards

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

No annotations are provided, so the description must fully disclose behavior. It states a read-only operation, but it does not mention whether results are paginated, if any side effects exist, or if authentication is required beyond 'admin only'. The lack of detail on common list operations reduces transparency.

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 front-loads the key information. However, its brevity omits necessary details about parameters and behavioral expectations, making it slightly under-specified.

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 no output schema and no annotation support, the description is incomplete. It lacks information on output format, pagination, filtering, and any prerequisites or limitations beyond 'admin only'. A more complete description would include these aspects.

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 a required 'input' object with no properties, but the description does not explain its purpose. With 0% schema documentation coverage, the description should compensate, but it provides no parameter guidance at all.

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 with public sharing links and includes 'admin only' to specify access level. It distinguishes from siblings like list_cards and list_embeddable_cards by focusing on public sharing links.

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 'admin only' constraint provides clear context for usage, but there is no explicit guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives like list_cards or list_embeddable_cards. The purpose is clear enough for an agent to infer usage.

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