kaiten_list_columns

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

Annotations already declare this a read-only, idempotent, non-destructive operation, so the safety profile is covered. The description adds a genuinely non-obvious behavioral fact — that pagination is applied locally rather than server-side — which changes how an agent should interpret limit/offset. It stops short of describing ordering rules or result shapes, but the output schema covers returns.

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 the action, with no filler. The only weakness is that the second sentence is terse enough to be cryptic about what 'locally' modifies.

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 tool is simple, has one required parameter, and an output schema exists, so return values need not be described. Still, missing parameter meaning and the unexplained 'Kaiten order' leave avoidable gaps for an agent invoking it the first time.

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 0% across three parameters, so the description carries the burden and does not meet it. It never explains that board_id identifies the parent board or how limit/offset interact with the local pagination it mentions, leaving the agent to infer bounds and defaults from the schema alone.

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 names a specific verb and resource ('List columns on a board') and scopes it to a single board, so an agent can distinguish it from the many card-level siblings. The trailing 'in Kaiten order' is vague and never explained, and it does not contrast with nearby tools like kaiten_list_lanes, which a user could confuse with columns.

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?

There is no guidance on when to call this versus alternatives, no prerequisites, and no exclusions. Use is only inferable from the name and the required board_id.

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