framedeck-mcp

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

Annotations cover idempotentHint=true and destructiveHint=false, indicating safe repetition. The description adds minimal behavioral context beyond this, failing to mention that partial title matching is supported (per schema) or what happens when moving to the same stage.

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 waste. Front-loaded with verb ('Move') and immediately conveys resource and destination. Appropriate length for the tool's complexity.

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?

Covers basic operation but misses opportunity to leverage the rich schema context (partial matching support, name-or-ID lookups) or explain idempotent behavior in domain terms. Adequate for a simple move operation but thin given the flexible identification scheme.

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?

Effectively bridges domain terminology ('stage' in description aligns with 'column' parameter name and description). Reinforces that 'card' is the primary resource for the 'id' parameter. With 100% schema coverage, this semantic mapping adds useful clarification.

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?

States a specific action (move) and target (card/frame to different stage) clearly. However, it does not explain what a 'frame' is relative to a 'card', nor does it distinguish from siblings like update_card that might also modify card state.

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?

Provides no guidance on when to use this versus update_card or create_card, no mention of prerequisites (e.g., card must exist), and no warnings about partial name matching behavior that could accidentally match multiple cards.

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