framedeck-mcp

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

Annotations indicate non-idempotent and open-world behavior, but description adds no context about side effects (e.g., duplicate creation on retries), authorization requirements, or what the tool returns. Relies entirely on structured annotations for safety profile disclosure.

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?

Single sentence with zero redundancy, appropriately front-loaded. However, extreme brevity results in underspecification for a tool with openWorld and non-idempotent characteristics that agents should know about.

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?

Minimally viable given comprehensive schema and present annotations covering read/write safety. However, lacks critical workflow context for board creation (e.g., relationship between 'project' and 'board' nomenclature, whether creation implies activation) and omits output behavior description.

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?

With 100% schema description coverage (all 4 parameters documented including enum explanations for mode), the schema carries full semantic weight. Description adds no parameter guidance, which meets baseline expectations when schema coverage is complete.

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?

Clear verb 'Create' and resource 'project/board', with platform context 'Framedeck'. Distinguishes from siblings creating cards/columns by specifying board-level resource. The slash notation hints at the dual mode types (classic vs creator) matching the schema enum, though this could be more explicit.

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 on when to use versus alternatives, workflow prerequisites (e.g., whether to set as active after creation), or how it relates to sibling tools like set_active_board or graduate_to_production. Zero exclusion criteria or alternative suggestions provided.

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