get_deck_board

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries the full burden for behavioral disclosure. It explicitly states that the tool returns a board along with all its stacks and cards, which is valuable context for the agent. While it doesn't mention error handling or auth, it sufficiently discloses the main return scope for a read operation.

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 extremely concise: two sentences, front-loaded with the main purpose and followed by a practical usage hint. Every sentence earns its place without unnecessary detail.

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 retrieval tool with one parameter, no output schema, and no annotations, the description is fully sufficient. It explains what the tool returns, how to obtain the required input, and gives clear usage guidance relative to sibling tools.

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 schema already provides 100% coverage for the single parameter boardId, with a description stating 'Board ID from get_deck_boards.' The tool description echoes this same relationship without adding new parameter-specific information, so the baseline of 3 for high schema coverage 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 clearly states the tool's function: 'Get a Deck board with all its stacks (columns) and cards.' It uses a specific verb (get) and resource (a specific board's stacks and cards), distinguishing it from sibling tools like get_deck_boards (which lists boards) and card creation/update tools.

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 provides explicit usage context by instructing to 'Use get_deck_boards first to find the board ID.' This clearly indicates a prerequisite and correct sequencing, helping the agent understand when this tool is appropriate relative to its sibling get_deck_boards.

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