List Board Lists

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

With no annotations, the description bears full responsibility for behavioral disclosure. It only states 'List lists', omitting any mention of side effects (none expected), authentication requirements, rate limits, or that it is a read-only operation. The agent cannot infer safety or impact.

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, efficient sentence that clearly states the tool's core action. It is appropriately sized for a simple list operation, though it could be slightly expanded to include a hint about output.

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?

Given the tool's simplicity and absence of output schema, the description is minimally complete for listing lists. However, it would benefit from stating that the return value is an array of list objects, as the agent currently has no indication of what the output contains.

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 coverage is 100%, so the parameter boardId is already documented with description and default value. The description does not add any additional semantics beyond what the schema provides, meeting the baseline expectation.

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 'List lists on a Trello board' clearly states the verb (list) and resource (lists), distinguishing it from sibling tools like list_boards or list_cards. However, it lacks additional specificity about scope or filtering.

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 on when to use this tool versus alternatives (e.g., search for specific lists, or use other list-related tools). The description does not mention prerequisites, such as requiring a board ID or the relationship to other operations.

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