Create a new card in a Trello list by providing the list ID and card name, with an optional description for additional details.
Crée une nouvelle carte dans une list Trello
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| desc | No | Parameter desc | |
| name | Yes | Parameter name | |
| listId | Yes | Parameter listId (24 characters) |
Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.
v2.1.0Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
No annotations are present, so the description carries the full behavioral disclosure burden. It only restates the basic creation action and does not mention side effects, prerequisites, permissions, reversibility, or response behavior.
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, front-loaded sentence with no filler. It earns its place but could be slightly more informative about usage without becoming verbose.
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 create operation with three scalar parameters, the description plus schema is arguably sufficient to invoke the tool. However, with no annotations and no output schema, the agent is left without information about call results, side effects, or when not to use the 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%, but the parameter descriptions are placeholders ('Parameter desc', etc.). The tool description adds only a vague hint that listId refers to a Trello list; parameter names like 'name' and 'desc' are self-evident. Baseline 3 applies due to full coverage.
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 a specific action ('Crée une nouvelle carte') and its target resource ('dans une list Trello'). This distinguishes it from sibling tools like list_trello_cards, move_trello_card, or archive_card.
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?
No guidance is provided about when to use this tool versus alternatives. Among the many card-related sibling tools, an agent is given no explicit cue for choosing create_trello_card over update_card_name, duplicate_card, or move_trello_card.
Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.