create_card

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

No annotations provided. The description only states it creates a card and returns the object, but misses behavioral traits like permissions needed, side effects (notifications), or constraints (e.g., maximum number of cards).

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?

Description is brief with a clear first sentence followed by a well-organized list. Every line adds value, though the list could be slightly more compact (e.g., grouping optional params).

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?

With 9 params, no output schema, and no annotations, the description covers param semantics and return value adequately but omits prerequisites, error scenarios, and integration with sibling tools like list_boards or list_members.

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 0%, so the description carries the burden. It adds meaningful details like 'due_date: YYYY-MM-DD format', 'assignee_ids: use list_members()', and 'extra_fields: {field_id: value}'. A few params (cell_id, iteration_id) are minimally explained, but overall it significantly supplements the 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 'Create a new card on the board.' with a specific verb and resource. It unambiguously distinguishes from siblings like update_card, find_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 on when to use this tool versus alternatives. It does not mention prerequisites (e.g., board existence) or scenarios where other tools like update_card would be more appropriate.

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