find_cards

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

Discloses case-insensitive matching, exact then substring priority, and behavior when value/values are omitted. Lacks information on pagination, rate limits, or permissions, but for a search tool this is adequate.

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?

Concise and front-loaded: the first sentence states purpose. No unnecessary words. Every sentence adds useful 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?

Without an output schema, the description should mention what is returned (e.g., list of card objects). It does not specify return format, which is a gap for a tool that finds multiple cards.

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%, but description adds value by explaining the logic of 'values' (ANY matching), omission of value/values meaning field is set, and case-insensitivity. This goes beyond schema descriptions.

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 clearly states it finds cards on a board with optional filters, and positions itself as 'the main tool'. It distinguishes well from sibling tools like get_card (single card) and set_custom_field (single field update).

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?

Provides examples of when to use value vs values, and explains matching behavior. However, it does not explicitly state when to use alternatives like get_card or list_custom_fields.

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