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

Annotations already cover the read-only, non-destructive, open-world profile, and the description adds real value beyond them: the ordering of results ('as they appear in Milanote'), the Home-board exclusion, and the auth requirement (Cotlet API key with app access). Return ordering semantics and an explicit privacy/visibility carve-out are disclosed.

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 what the tool returns, then explains the nesting model, then the Home-board exclusion and auth note. Four sentences, each contributing something, with only mild redundancy between the 'nested sub-boards' opening and the later nesting explanation.

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 read-only list tool with annotations carrying the safety profile and no output schema, the description explains the shape of results (title, parent, ID) and the hierarchy traversal, which is enough to call it correctly. Pagination behavior beyond the limit default is left implicit but is minor.

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%, so the baseline is 3, but the description adds meaning to parent_board_id by framing it as the way to descend into nested boards rather than just a filter, and it explains the default top-level scope. This goes beyond the schema's terse 'Only boards inside this board.'

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 (list) and resource (boards and nested sub-boards) plus what each entry contains (title, parent board, ID). The scope is clear enough to separate it from get_board or search_boards, though no sibling is named explicitly.

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 concrete usage context: use parent_board_id to walk down the hierarchy, and the top level is the default when it is omitted. Also warns that the Home board is not listed. No explicit when-to-use alternative (e.g. search_boards) is named, but the traversal guidance is clear.

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