toggle_kanban_card_tool

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

Without annotations, the description mentions preserving metadata and performance (<500ms for 1000 cards). It lacks details on side effects, idempotency, or permissions, but provides reasonable behavioral context.

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 well-structured with a clear title, usage lists, and return section. It is moderately concise and front-loaded, with no unnecessary verbosity.

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 no output schema, the description includes return values. It covers tool purpose, parameters, and performance. Missing explanation of the 'ctx' parameter, but overall it is comprehensive for a simple toggle operation.

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 75%; description adds context like exact match requirement and relative path interpretation. However, parameter 'ctx' is unexplained, and the description does not significantly enhance the schema information beyond baseline.

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 it toggles a Kanban card's completion status between incomplete and complete, specifying the exact checkbox format. It distinguishes itself from siblings like add_kanban_card_tool and toggle_task_status_tool.

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 'When to use' section lists clear use cases like marking cards complete and batch updates. However, it does not explicitly mention when not to use this tool or provide comparisons to alternatives like toggle_task_status_tool.

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