kaiten_list_removed_boards

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

With no annotations, the description carries the behavioral transparency burden. It discloses a non-obvious and actionable caveat: the endpoint may return 405 and may not be available. The read-only nature is implied by 'list,' and no side effects or output shape are discussed, but the explicit failure mode is valuable.

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?

Two concise sentences: the first states the operation and source, the second warns about a possible 405. There is no redundant or filler content.

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?

The tool is simple, with only two optional parameters and no output schema. The description covers the resource, source, and a key failure mode. It could explicitly describe the return format, but for a straightforward list operation the current text is sufficient.

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%: limit is described as 'Max results' and offset as 'Pagination offset.' The description adds no parameter-specific detail, so the baseline score of 3 is appropriate because the schema already carries the semantic load.

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 states a specific verb and resource: 'List removed (deleted) boards from the recycle bin.' This clearly distinguishes it from the active-board listing sibling kaiten_list_boards and other board operations.

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 use case is clear from 'removed (deleted) boards' and 'recycle bin,' but the description does not explicitly contrast with kaiten_list_boards or state when not to use this tool. The usage guidance is implied rather than spelled out.

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