trello_create_card

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries full burden but only states the action without behavioral details. It doesn't disclose permissions required, rate limits, whether the operation is idempotent, or what happens on failure. For a creation tool with zero annotation coverage, this is a significant gap in transparency.

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 extremely concise with just three words, front-loaded with the key action. There's no wasted verbiage or redundancy, making it efficient for quick parsing.

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 no annotations and no output schema, the description is incomplete for a creation tool. It doesn't explain what the tool returns (e.g., card ID), error conditions, or dependencies on other tools. For a 4-parameter tool with rich sibling context, this minimal description leaves too many gaps.

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 description coverage is 100%, so the schema fully documents all parameters. The description adds no additional meaning beyond the schema, such as explaining relationships between parameters or usage examples. Baseline 3 is appropriate when the schema does all the work.

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 'Create a new card' clearly states the action (create) and resource (card), which is adequate. However, it doesn't differentiate from sibling tools like trello_create_board or trello_create_list, leaving ambiguity about the specific resource hierarchy. It's not tautological but lacks sibling distinction.

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 provides no guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives. For example, it doesn't mention prerequisites like needing a list_id from trello_get_board_lists or when to choose trello_update_card instead. This leaves the agent without context for proper tool selection.

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