kaiten_list_checklist_items

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries the full burden. 'List all items' indicates a read operation and an all-items scope, but it does not disclose output format, pagination, or prerequisites. Minimal behavioral context is added beyond the tool name.

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 concise sentence with no filler or redundancy. It is front-loaded with the verb and resource and every word contributes to meaning.

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?

This is a simple tool with two fully documented parameters, but there is no output schema. The description adequately implies the return type ('items') but leaves return-field details, error conditions, and checklist-card relationship assumptions unstated.

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%, with both card_id and checklist_id adequately described. The description itself adds no parameter-level meaning, but the schema already covers that need, so the baseline score of 3 is appropriate.

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 the tool lists all items in a checklist on a Kaiten card, with a specific verb and resource. It is unambiguous and easily understood, though it does not explicitly contrast itself with related sibling tools.

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 usage context is implied by the description: call this when you need the items from a specific checklist. However, there is no explicit guidance on when to use this versus alternatives like list_checklists, nor any exclusion statements.

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