Import Board File (.bdrl.json)

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

Annotations already indicate destructiveHint=true, and the description discloses additional behavioral traits: the live canvas is switched and the automatic snapshot is refreshed. This goes beyond the annotations, but does not fully cover side effects like previous canvas state or undo behavior.

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 a single sentence listing multiple sequential actions (read, import, switch, refresh), which is slightly cluttered. While it is not overly verbose, front-loading the key action and breaking into clearer steps would improve readability.

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 one required parameter and no output schema, the description covers the main effects but omits error cases, file existence checks, and return value details. It assumes the workspace is configured, which is mentioned but not elaborated. Adequate but not fully complete.

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?

The input schema has 100% coverage for the single parameter 'filename', describing it as a .bdrl.json filename in the configured workspace. The description adds 'canonical schema-v2' specificity, but this is a minor enhancement. Baseline 3 is appropriate since the schema already carries the primary semantic load.

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 the tool reads a specific file format (.bdrl.json, schema-v2) from the configured workspace, imports it, switches the live canvas, and refreshes the snapshot. The verb 'import' and resource 'board file' are explicit, and the tool is easily distinguished from siblings like 'export_board_file' and 'set_board_workspace'.

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 implies usage for importing board files but does not explicitly state when to use this tool versus alternatives. No when-not guidelines or references to sibling tools are provided, so the agent must infer the appropriate context.

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