List Lanes

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

The annotations already cover readOnly, idempotent, and non-destructive behavior. The description adds genuinely useful behavioral context beyond the schema: the default lane often has an empty title and should be identified by lowest sort_order. This is a real quirk an agent needs to know.

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 every sentence earns its place: the resource, the downstream use for card operations, and the important default-lane caveat. There is no filler or repetition of annotation information.

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 simple read-only list tool with two well-documented parameters, the description provides enough context: what it returns, where boardId comes from, how to use the result, and a subtle data quirk. The lack of an output schema means return fields are not formally described, but the sort_order mention partially compensates.

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 schema already documents boardId and verbosity. The description's 'boardId from kaiten_list_boards' repeats the schema property description and adds no new parameter-level meaning. The note about default lanes is useful but relates to the return data rather than to parameter semantics.

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 identifies the resource (swimlanes for a board) and the action is clear from the title 'List Lanes', so an agent understands this returns lanes for a given board. It is distinguishable from siblings like list_columns and list_subcolumns because it explicitly says 'swimlanes', though it never uses an explicit verb like 'List'.

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 ties the tool to its concrete use case: obtaining laneId values for kaiten_create_card and kaiten_update_card when the board uses lanes. It also points to kaiten_list_boards for boardId, providing a clear workflow context. It does not explicitly say when not to use it or name alternative tools, but the usage context is strong.

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