Create Card

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

The description goes well beyond annotations by disclosing the non-obvious POST /cards flat payload behavior, the fact that board_title and column_title may be null in min/normal verbosity, and the workaround of re-fetching or using raw verbosity. It also explains why ownerId is mandatory in practice, which is not evident from the annotations alone.

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 compact and front-loaded: purpose first, then required IDs, then optional parameters, then the important API-response caveat. Every sentence earns its place without repeating the schema's property descriptions.

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 14-parameter create tool with no output schema, the description covers the critical operational aspects: required board/column context, optional fields, the owner requirement, and the flat-payload response quirk with a concrete remedy. An agent has enough information to invoke the tool correctly and to handle the common post-create confusion.

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. The description adds extra meaning by telling the agent which list tools provide each ID and by adding the operational rationale for ownerId. These are useful cross-tool semantics that the schema alone does not provide.

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 opens with the specific action 'Create card' and clearly identifies the card being created. It distinguishes itself from kaiten_update_card, kaiten_get_card, and kaiten_search_cards by focusing on creation and by naming the required board and column context.

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 gives clear context for when to call this tool: creating a card in a specific board and column, with optional lane, type, and size. It tells the agent where to source IDs from (kaiten_list_boards, kaiten_list_columns, kaiten_list_lanes, kaiten_list_card_types) and explicitly advises re-fetching via kaiten_get_card to populate missing response fields. It does not explicitly contrast with kaiten_update_card, but the use case is clear enough.

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