Server Quality Checklist

Tool Scores

• delete_taskC
  2.6/5.0
  Behavior2/5

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

  No annotations provided; description says 'archive' (ambiguous, not delete) and returns details, but does not disclose if the action is reversible, permissions needed, or any side effects. Critical behavioral traits missing for a mutation tool.

  Agents need to know what a tool does to the world before calling it. Descriptions should go beyond structured annotations to explain consequences.

  Conciseness4/5

  Is the description appropriately sized, front-loaded, and free of redundancy?

  Single sentence, front-loaded with action and resource. However, it is too concise, omitting important context that could be included without significant bloat.

  Shorter descriptions cost fewer tokens and are easier for agents to parse. Every sentence should earn its place.

  Completeness2/5

  Given the tool's complexity, does the description cover enough for an agent to succeed on first attempt?

  Output schema exists but description does not leverage it; no explanation of return value details. For a tool with no annotations, missing context on reversibility, use cases, and effects makes it incomplete.

  Complex tools with many parameters or behaviors need more documentation. Simple tools need less. This dimension scales expectations accordingly.

  Parameters1/5

  Does the description clarify parameter syntax, constraints, interactions, or defaults beyond what the schema provides?

  Schema has 0% description coverage; description adds no meaning to the sole parameter 'card_id' beyond implied identification. No format, source, or constraints explained.

  Input schemas describe structure but not intent. Descriptions should explain non-obvious parameter relationships and valid value ranges.

  Purpose4/5

  Does the description clearly state what the tool does and how it differs from similar tools?

  Description clearly states the action (archive) and resource (Trello card), and differentiates from siblings like complete_task, add_task, list_tasks by implying a destructive or state-changing operation.

  Agents choose between tools based on descriptions. A clear purpose with a specific verb and resource helps agents select the right tool.

  Usage Guidelines2/5

  Does the description explain when to use this tool, when not to, or what alternatives exist?

  No guidance on when to use this tool vs alternatives, no prerequisites or conditions mentioned. The description only states what it does, not when to apply it.

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

• add_taskC
  2.7/5.0
  Behavior2/5

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

  No annotations provided, and the description only says 'in the configured To Do list' without explaining side effects, auth needs, or behavior on failure. Minimal disclosure.

  Agents need to know what a tool does to the world before calling it. Descriptions should go beyond structured annotations to explain consequences.

  Conciseness3/5

  Is the description appropriately sized, front-loaded, and free of redundancy?

  The description is a single short sentence, making it concise but lacking structure. It could benefit from being expanded to cover key details without becoming verbose.

  Shorter descriptions cost fewer tokens and are easier for agents to parse. Every sentence should earn its place.

  Completeness2/5

  Given the tool's complexity, does the description cover enough for an agent to succeed on first attempt?

  The output schema exists but is not described, and the tool's behavior regarding the 'configured' list is vague. Important context like prerequisites and return values is missing.

  Complex tools with many parameters or behaviors need more documentation. Simple tools need less. This dimension scales expectations accordingly.

  Parameters1/5

  Does the description clarify parameter syntax, constraints, interactions, or defaults beyond what the schema provides?

  Schema description coverage is 0%, yet the description does not explain the title or description parameters. The agent must guess their meaning from the schema alone, which is insufficient.

  Input schemas describe structure but not intent. Descriptions should explain non-obvious parameter relationships and valid value ranges.

  Purpose5/5

  Does the description clearly state what the tool does and how it differs from similar tools?

  The description clearly states the tool creates a Trello card, using a specific verb and resource. It distinguishes from sibling tools (complete_task, delete_task, list_tasks) which handle different operations.

  Agents choose between tools based on descriptions. A clear purpose with a specific verb and resource helps agents select the right tool.

  Usage Guidelines2/5

  Does the description explain when to use this tool, when not to, or what alternatives exist?

  No explicit when-to-use or when-not-to-use guidance. While siblings are distinct, the description lacks context on prerequisites (e.g., configured list) or alternatives.

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

• complete_taskC
  2.9/5.0
  Behavior2/5

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

  No annotations; description only says move to Done list. Does not disclose side effects, permissions, or other behaviors.

  Agents need to know what a tool does to the world before calling it. Descriptions should go beyond structured annotations to explain consequences.

  Conciseness4/5

  Is the description appropriately sized, front-loaded, and free of redundancy?

  Single sentence, no wasted words. Could benefit from structure but is efficient.

  Shorter descriptions cost fewer tokens and are easier for agents to parse. Every sentence should earn its place.

  Completeness2/5

  Given the tool's complexity, does the description cover enough for an agent to succeed on first attempt?

  Simple tool with output schema, but description lacks return value info, error conditions, or context about the configured Done list.

  Complex tools with many parameters or behaviors need more documentation. Simple tools need less. This dimension scales expectations accordingly.

  Parameters2/5

  Does the description clarify parameter syntax, constraints, interactions, or defaults beyond what the schema provides?

  Schema coverage 0%; description adds 'card_id' context but no additional meaning beyond schema.

  Input schemas describe structure but not intent. Descriptions should explain non-obvious parameter relationships and valid value ranges.

  Purpose5/5

  Does the description clearly state what the tool does and how it differs from similar tools?

  Clear action: 'Move a Trello card' into a specific list (Done). Distinguishes from siblings like delete_task, add_task, list_tasks.

  Agents choose between tools based on descriptions. A clear purpose with a specific verb and resource helps agents select the right tool.

  Usage Guidelines2/5

  Does the description explain when to use this tool, when not to, or what alternatives exist?

  No guidance on when to use this tool vs alternatives, no prerequisites or exclusions. Only states the action.

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

• list_tasksA
  3.7/5.0
  Behavior2/5

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

  No annotations are provided, so the description carries full burden. It mentions 'active cards' but does not clarify what 'active' means, whether there is pagination, ordering, or any side effects. The scope of returned data is vague.

  Agents need to know what a tool does to the world before calling it. Descriptions should go beyond structured annotations to explain consequences.

  Conciseness5/5

  Is the description appropriately sized, front-loaded, and free of redundancy?

  The description is a single, clear sentence with no superfluous information. It is appropriately concise and front-loaded, conveying the core purpose without waste.

  Shorter descriptions cost fewer tokens and are easier for agents to parse. Every sentence should earn its place.

  Completeness3/5

  Given the tool's complexity, does the description cover enough for an agent to succeed on first attempt?

  Given the tool has no parameters and an output schema exists, the description minimally covers the purpose. However, it does not explain return value details, what constitutes 'active', or any constraints (e.g., maximum number of cards). This leaves some ambiguity for the agent.

  Complex tools with many parameters or behaviors need more documentation. Simple tools need less. This dimension scales expectations accordingly.

  Parameters4/5

  Does the description clarify parameter syntax, constraints, interactions, or defaults beyond what the schema provides?

  There are no parameters, so baseline is 4. The description does not add meaning beyond the empty schema, but that is acceptable since no additional parameter context is needed. However, it misses an opportunity to clarify if any implicit defaults or configurations apply.

  Input schemas describe structure but not intent. Descriptions should explain non-obvious parameter relationships and valid value ranges.

  Purpose5/5

  Does the description clearly state what the tool does and how it differs from similar tools?

  The description clearly states the tool lists active cards from a configured To Do list. It uses a specific verb ('list') and resource ('cards from To Do list'), and is distinct from sibling tools (complete, delete, add), so purpose is unambiguous.

  Agents choose between tools based on descriptions. A clear purpose with a specific verb and resource helps agents select the right tool.

  Usage Guidelines3/5

  Does the description explain when to use this tool, when not to, or what alternatives exist?

  While the description implies this is for retrieving tasks, it does not explicitly state when to use this tool versus alternatives like complete_task or add_task. The context of sibling tools provides some implied guidance, but lacks direct when-not-to-use or prerequisite information.

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