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

Annotations declare a non-read-only, non-destructive, open-world write. The description adds meaningful context beyond that: the board is private until shared, it "reaches no one," the undo path is moving it to trash, and it returns the new board ID. That privacy/reversibility disclosure is genuinely useful and consistent with the 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?

Purpose and nesting scope are front-loaded, and each sentence carries information (return value, privacy, undo, auth). The phrasing "It reaches no one, so it runs without asking" is slightly oblique but still earns its place by conveying the no-confirmation behavior.

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 two-parameter create tool with no output schema, the description covers the return value (board ID), privacy/reversibility, and auth requirement, so an agent has what it needs to invoke it correctly. Minor gap: no explicit pointer to the follow-up card-adding tools by name.

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 100%, so the schema already documents both title and parent_board_id. The description restates the nesting/top-level option but adds no syntax or format detail beyond what the schema provides, so baseline 3 applies.

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?

States a specific verb and resource ("New board") plus its placement options (top level or nested), which is more precise than the title alone. It doesn't explicitly contrast with siblings like get_board or list_boards, but the create intent is unambiguous.

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 explains nesting via parent_board_id and notes the action needs no confirmation ("runs without asking"), but it gives no explicit when-to-use versus alternatives or prerequisites beyond the API key note. Usage is implied rather than directed.

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