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

Annotations declare it a safe read, and the description adds substantial behavior beyond them: return shape (text vs download link per format), a hard restriction on home boards, format-specific page limits (PDF/PNG single page, Word multi-page), and an auth requirement (Cotlet API key with app access).

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?

Front-loads the purpose, then behavior, constraints, and prerequisites in a tight set of sentences with no filler. Slightly dense but every sentence contributes.

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?

With no output schema, the description correctly carries the return-format burden and covers restrictions and auth. Nothing an agent needs to call it correctly is missing.

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 coverage is 100% and the enum documents the format values, so baseline is 3. The description adds real meaning by tying behavior to the format parameter (which formats return text vs a link, and their page limits).

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 (Export) and resource (a board) and enumerates the supported output formats. An agent can distinguish it from siblings like milanote_get_board or milanote_list_boards without opening either schema.

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?

Gives clear context (runs the same export as the Export button) and an explicit exclusion (Home boards cannot be exported). It stops short of naming sibling alternatives, but the when-not condition is present.

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