planka_create_custom_field

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

No annotations provided, so description carries full burden. It does not disclose any behavioral traits like immediate availability, permissions, or side effects. Minimal disclosure beyond the action itself.

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 a single sentence with no fluff, but it is too concise, lacking necessary context. Every sentence should earn its place, and this one could be expanded to add value without becoming verbose.

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 multiple parameters (name, position, show_on_front_of_card), no output schema, and no annotations, the description is incomplete. It does not explain what a custom field is or the implications of parameters like show_on_front_of_card.

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 0% per context, but the description adds no value beyond the schema. It does not explain parameters like custom_field_group_id, name, position, or show_on_front_of_card. The description fails to compensate for the lack of schema descriptions.

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 the action (create) and resource (custom field inside a custom field group). However, it does not differentiate from sibling tools like planka_update_custom_field or planka_delete_custom_field, lacking specificity about the scope.

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?

No guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives, such as updating an existing custom field. No prerequisites or context about when creation is appropriate.

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