card-addOrRemoveLabel

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

Without annotations, the description carries full burden for behavioral disclosure. It only states 'adds or removes' but does not specify whether the operation is idempotent, what happens if the label already exists, or any side effects. No info on auth, rate limits, or error conditions.

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?

The description is a single functional sentence plus a tags line. While concise, it lacks essential details for a tool with no parameter descriptions and no annotations. It could be restructured to include parameter hints or behavioral notes without losing brevity.

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?

Given the tool's simplicity (2 required params, no output schema), the description is underspecified. It does not confirm what IDs are acceptable, whether the operation toggles, or what the response indicates. A user would need external documentation to use it correctly.

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?

The input schema has 2 parameters with zero description coverage. The description does not explain what 'cardPublicId' or 'labelPublicId' represent (e.g., format, source). The tool name implies labels, but param meanings are entirely implicit.

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 explicitly states the action 'adds or removes a label from a card', identifying the resource (card) and the operation. This distinguishes it from sibling tools like label-create (creates labels) or card-update (updates card fields).

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 provides no guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives, nor does it explain the conditions for adding vs removing a label. It lacks explicit when-to-use or when-not-to-use context.

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