yougile_get_board

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true and destructiveHint=false, so the safety profile is known. The description adds the 'by ID' scoping constraint, but doesn't provide additional behavioral context such as return format, error handling, or required permissions. With annotations present, this is adequate but not rich.

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, front-loaded sentence that states exactly what the tool does without any filler or redundancy. Every word contributes value, making it highly efficient and easy to parse.

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?

For a simple get-by-ID tool with one parameter, good annotations, and no output schema, the description provides sufficient context: it tells the agent what the tool does ('get details') and what is needed (the board's ID). It could mention what 'details' includes, but that is not critical for tool selection or invocation.

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?

The input schema has 100% coverage, documenting 'id' as a 'Board UUID'. The description only restates that the tool operates on a specific board by ID, adding no new meaning beyond what the schema already conveys. Baseline of 3 is appropriate since the schema handles parameter documentation.

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 uses a specific verb ('Get') and clearly identifies the resource ('board') and the scoping mechanism ('by ID'). It distinguishes this from sibling tools like yougile_list_boards (which lists all boards) and yougile_create_board/update_board (which modify boards), leaving no ambiguity about the tool's function.

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 implies the use case: you need a board's UUID to retrieve its details. However, it does not explicitly state when to use this tool versus alternatives, nor mention that yougile_list_boards could be used to find the ID if unknown. The usage context is clear but not fully articulated.

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