find_cards_by_role

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true and openWorldHint=true, indicating a safe, non-deterministic read operation. The description adds no additional behavioral details beyond what is implied by 'Find cards', which is consistent. It does not contradict and offers minimal extra context.

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 two efficient sentences: one listing the specific roles, one listing the arguments. Every phrase earns its place, no redundancy. Critical information is front-loaded.

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 description covers the essential aspects of role-based card search given its complexity (5 params, output schema exists). It lists roles and parameters clearly. One minor gap: it doesn't explain default behavior (e.g., empty colors means all), but overall it is sufficient for an AI agent to correctly invoke the tool.

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 0% coverage (no descriptions), so the description carries the full burden. It provides meaningful explanations for all five parameters: role (lists specific roles), colors (abbreviations), format (modern/commander), max_price (budget), and limit (range). This adds value beyond the bare schema.

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 finds cards by strategic role, listing 13 specific roles. This differentiates it from siblings like 'find_cards' or 'search_cards' which likely have broader or different search criteria.

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 provides clear context for when to use: when you need cards fulfilling a specific strategic role, with options for colors, format, max price, and limit. It does not explicitly say when not to use or name alternatives, but the role-focused purpose is evident.

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