planka_list_cards

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

With no annotations, the description carries full burden for behavioral disclosure. It merely states the tool lists cards with filtering and pagination, but does not disclose any behavioral traits such as ordering, caching, rate limits, or whether it returns only non-archived cards.

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 concise (one sentence) but lacks structure and substance. It could be expanded to include key details 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 number of parameters (9) and no output schema, the description is incomplete. It does not explain filtering options, pagination behavior, output formats, or detail levels, leaving the agent to rely solely on the schema.

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%, so the description must compensate but fails to add any meaning beyond parameter names. While the schema itself has good descriptions for each parameter, the tool description does not explain how the parameters interact or their relevance.

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 ('List') and resource ('cards'), and mentions filtering and pagination. However, it does not differentiate this tool from sibling tools like 'planka_get_card' or 'planka_find_and_get_card', which also involve listing or retrieving cards.

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 is provided on when to use this tool versus alternatives. The description lacks any context about prerequisites, typical use cases, or scenarios where this tool is preferred over others.

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