List Space Cards

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

Annotations already cover safety (readOnly, idempotent, non-destructive), so the description only needs to add behavior. It adds the newest-first ordering and no-filter scope. It does not mention the condition filter default or pagination behavior, but those are documented in the schema; 'no filters' is a slight simplification of the condition parameter but not an annotation contradiction.

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 with the key behavior front-loaded and the alternative in the second sentence. No redundant material.

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 rich schema (all five parameters documented) and safety annotations, the description supplies the remaining selection context: ordering, scope, absence of search filters, and the sibling to use when filtering is required. Nothing essential is missing for invoking the tool 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?

Schema description coverage is 100%, so the schema carries parameter documentation. The description adds no parameter-level detail beyond the 'no filters' framing, which is usage guidance rather than parameter semantics; baseline 3 is appropriate.

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 a specific verb-resource pair ('cards in a space'), the ordering ('newest first'), and an explicit exclusion ('no filters'), which lets the agent distinguish this from kaiten_search_cards and kaiten_get_board_cards without opening the schema.

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?

It explicitly says when this tool is appropriate ('recent cards... no filters') and names the alternative for the filtered case ('For filtered search use kaiten_search_cards'). This gives clear selection guidance.

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