get_cards_in_list

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden for behavioral disclosure. It merely says 'Get all cards in a list' without mentioning default filter (open), response format, pagination via maxItems, or limitations. The schema details parameters, but the description adds no contextual behavior, making it under-disclosing for a read operation without annotation support.

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, both purposeful. The first states the function, the second gives usage intent. No fluff or redundancy, and the key verb+resource is front-loaded.

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 no output schema and no annotations, the description should explain what the tool returns (e.g., an array of card objects) and how parameters like filter or summarize affect outcomes. It only says 'Get all cards' without noting default behavior or response structure, leaving a significant gap for a 6-parameter tool.

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%, covering all 6 parameters including listId, filter, fields, detailLevel, maxItems, and summarize. The description adds no parameter-specific semantics beyond 'all cards', so it relies on the schema. The baseline of 3 is appropriate because the schema does the heavy lifting.

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 retrieves all cards in a list, with the additional phrase 'Use this tool to see the contents of a list' reinforcing its purpose. The verb 'get' plus resource 'cards in a list' is specific and distinguishes it from list-level operations like get_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 second sentence provides a clear usage context: 'Use this tool to see the contents of a list.' It implies this is the right tool for inspecting list contents, but does not explicitly mention alternatives or when not to use it. Sibling tools like get_list or get_card are not referenced, so it could be stronger with exclusions.

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