create_board

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

With no annotations, the description carries the burden of behavioral disclosure. It explains the key behavioral nuance of default_lists (standard vs. blank board), which goes beyond the schema. It doesn't detail all side effects, but the create action itself is straightforward and the output schema covers return values.

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 concise sentence that delivers the core purpose plus a useful tip. No wasted words, and it's well-structured.

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 3-parameter create tool with an output schema, the description covers the primary purpose and the one non-obvious option. It could mention prerequisites like authentication, but those are typically implied. Overall, it's adequately complete for the complexity.

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 0%, so the description must compensate. It provides meaningful context for default_lists (the least obvious parameter) but doesn't explicitly describe name or description. However, those are self-explanatory from their names. The added value is moderate but incomplete.

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 'Create a new board' with a specific verb and resource. It distinguishes from sibling tools like create_card and create_list by naming the board resource. The additional hint about default_lists adds specificity.

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 implicitly defines when to use the tool (when creating a board) and provides usage nuance with 'Set default_lists=false for a blank board.' It doesn't explicitly say when not to use it or name alternatives, but the context is clear and helpful.

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