Get Board Columns

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

The description adds useful behavioral context beyond the readOnlyHint annotation by clarifying that results include status mappings and are richer than simpler board column endpoints. It does not mention auth or rate limits, but for a simple read-only lookup with a readOnlyHint, the safety profile is already clear.

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 dense sentences with no filler: the action is first, then the use case, then the comparison to sibling tools. Every sentence contributes value.

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 has one fully documented parameter, a readOnlyHint annotation, and an output schema, so the description does not need to explain return values. The provided use case and sibling differentiation make the description complete for an agent to select and call the tool correctly.

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%: the only parameter, `board_id`, is described as an agile board identifier returned by `boards_get_all`. The tool description adds the Yandex Tracker context but does not need to compensate for missing parameter documentation because the schema already covers it.

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: getting the columns of a Yandex Tracker agile board, including the statuses mapped to each column. It also explicitly distinguishes this tool from `boards_get_all` and `board_get`, so an agent can tell them apart without opening their schemas.

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 gives a concrete use case: see which status an issue needs to show up in a given column. It also names alternatives and explains why this tool is preferable when status mappings matter, since sibling board endpoints carry columns without statuses.

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