List Board Columns

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true and destructiveHint=false, so the safety profile is covered. The description adds that columns represent workflow stages and lists returned fields, which is useful, but it does not disclose additional behavioral traits such as pagination, authorization requirements, or any implicit ordering beyond 'positions.'

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 two sentences with no redundant filler. It front-loads the primary action, adds domain context, and then states the return fields, with every sentence contributing value.

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 fully documented required parameters, the description is complete: it explains what the columns represent, the expected return contents, and the input context. There is no output schema, but the description adequately covers what an agent needs to know to invoke and interpret the result.

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%, and both board_id and account_slug are already well-documented with examples and guidance on how to obtain valid values. The description adds no new parameter-level detail, so the baseline of 3 applies.

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 uses a specific verb and resource: 'Get all workflow columns on a board,' which clearly distinguishes this from single-column tools like fizzy_get_column. It also states what is returned, removing any ambiguity about the tool's purpose.

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 clearly indicates this tool is for retrieving all workflow columns for a specific board, providing a clear context for use. It does not explicitly name alternatives or exclusions, such as 'use fizzy_get_column for a single column,' but the sibling set makes this reasonably inferable.

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