get_deck_boards

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries the full burden. It clearly implies a read-only operation ('List') and discloses the return fields (board IDs, titles, colors). It does not mention ordering, archived boards, or pagination, but for a simple list operation this is decent.

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, front-loaded sentence with an active verb and no filler. It states purpose and output in a compact way.

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 zero-input, no-output-schema tool, the description covers the essential aspects: what it lists, scope, and return values. Minor omissions like sorting order or inclusion of archived boards prevent a 5, but it is sufficiently 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 tool has zero parameters, so the schema coverage is trivially 100%. Per the baseline for 0 params, the description does not need to add parameter semantics. It focuses on output instead, which is appropriate.

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?

Description uses specific verb 'List' and resource 'Nextcloud Deck boards' with a clear user-access scope. This distinguishes it from the sibling tool get_deck_board, which likely retrieves a single board, and from other list 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 clearly indicates this is for listing all accessible boards, which provides clear context for when to use it. However, it does not explicitly mention when not to use it or alternatives like get_deck_board for a single board.

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