Create an item

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

The description goes beyond annotations by explaining that 'This server converts them to the JSON that monday.com stores,' disclosing a non-obvious server-side transformation. Annotations (readOnlyHint=false, idempotentHint=false, destructiveHint=false) are sparse and not contradicted. However, it does not detail error behavior, return values, or side effects.

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?

Three short sentences that front-load the purpose, then explain value formatting, and end with a prerequisite. Every sentence adds information and no fluff.

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?

For a create tool with 5 parameters and a nested `values` object, the description covers the core usage and prerequisite. It does not mention return value or error handling, but no output schema exists, so those details are less critical. The description is solid and sufficiently complete for the complexity.

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 100% with descriptions for all parameters. The description adds crucial meaning for the `values` parameter: keys can be column id or title, values should be plain (e.g., 'Done', '2026-08-14'), and the server converts them. This is more specific than the schema's example.

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: 'Creates one item on a board.' This clearly distinguishes it from update/delete/subitem tools, though it does not explicitly name an alternative. The wording is unambiguous and informative.

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?

Provides a clear prerequisite: 'Call monday_get_board first to see the columns.' This gives the agent a concrete step for using the tool correctly. It implies the tool is for adding new items to a board, but does not explicitly mention when not to use it or alternatives like monday_create_subitem.

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