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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint, idempotentHint and non-destructive behavior, so the safety profile is covered without the description. The description adds the workflow context but says nothing about pagination, result size, or what a board object contains.

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?

Two short sentences, front-loaded with what the tool does and followed by the single most useful integration fact. No filler.

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 single-parameter list tool with full annotation coverage, the description plus schema give enough to call it correctly and to use the result. Minor gap: no note on return shape (board id/name) or whether all boards are returned, and there is no output schema to compensate.

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% and the single parameter is already documented as 'uid of a Pinterest account from list_social_accounts'. The description adds no further meaning about the parameter, which is acceptable at full coverage.

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 ('Lists the boards on a connected Pinterest account') and is clearly distinct from sibling list tools such as list_media, list_posts and list_social_accounts.

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?

Explains the downstream purpose — Pinterest posts must target a board, so the returned board id is passed to create_post.pinterest.board_id — which tells the agent why and when to call this before create_post. It does not explicitly name list_social_accounts as the prerequisite for obtaining social_account_uid, though the schema covers that.

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