List nodes

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

The annotation readOnlyHint=true already covers safety. The description adds that the tool returns id, type, name, text, position, and size, and can operate on the current page or inside a container. This supplements the annotation with specific behavioral details without contradicting it.

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?

Three short sentences deliver purpose, return payload, and use case. There is no redundancy; each sentence is informative and front-loaded with the core action.

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 4 optional params and no output schema, the description explains return fields, scope, and intended use. It leverages the schema for parameter details, making it sufficiently complete for a read-only list operation. The use case is clear and aligned with the tool's role.

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%, so baseline is 3. The description mentions 'specific container' (mapping to parentId) but does not elaborate on depth, limit, or types. It adds marginal value beyond the schema, which already fully describes each parameter.

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 states 'List nodes on the current page, or inside a specific container,' clearly identifying the action and scope. It lists return fields and the use case 'to understand an existing board before editing it,' which distinguishes it from sibling tools like find_nodes or get_node. This is a specific verb+resource with clear differentiation.

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 an explicit use case: 'Use this to understand an existing board before editing it.' This implies a read-only exploration context, but it does not explicitly state when not to use the tool or name alternative tools such as find_nodes for searching. Clear context with no exclusions or alternatives.

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