list_boards

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries the full burden. It discloses the HTTP method (GET), the specific endpoint, and the error condition (404) with a workaround. It also mentions the maxResults parameter behavior (default 50, max 50). However, it does not discuss authentication, rate limits, or other potential side effects, but for a read-only list operation, this is adequate.

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 two efficient sentences. The first sentence states purpose and endpoint. The second sentence gives usage guidance and error handling. No wasted words.

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 the tool has only one optional parameter and no output schema, the description covers the key points: purpose, endpoint, usage with alternatives, and error handling. It does not explain the return format, but that is less critical for a simple list tool. It is nearly complete.

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 100% for the single parameter (maxResults), which has a clear description in the schema. The description does not add extra semantics beyond what the schema already provides, so baseline 3 is appropriate. The overall description provides context about error handling but not parameter-specific details.

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 'List Jira Software boards' with the specific REST endpoint. It distinguishes from sibling tools by focusing on Agile boards, with a note about using names/ids with create_ticket when project is ambiguous.

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 explicit guidance on when to use the tool (for listing boards) and when to use alternatives ('Use names/ids with create_ticket when project is ambiguous'). It also gives error handling advice for 404 responses.

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