List Trello Boards

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

Without annotations, the description discloses that only open boards are listed and only those visible to the authenticated user, providing key behavioral context. It does not mention rate limits or pagination, but the tool is simple with no parameters.

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, well-structured sentence that front-loads the action and resource, making it efficient and easy to parse.

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 parameterless tool with no output schema, the description covers the essential behavior (listing open, visible boards). It is adequate for the low complexity, though it could mention output format or limitations.

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?

There are no parameters; the baseline is 4. The description adds value by specifying the subset of boards ('open' and 'visible to authenticated member'), which is helpful context beyond the empty schema.

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 action ('List') and the resource ('open Trello boards') with scope ('visible to the authenticated member'), distinguishing it from sibling tools that focus on cards, lists, or modifications.

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 implies usage for retrieving available boards but does not explicitly state when to use it versus alternatives, such as when needing closed or archived boards. No when-not-to-use guidance is provided.

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