List monday.com boards

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint and openWorldHint, so safety context is covered. The description adds behavioral details: 'newest use first' ordering and that search filters on name (per schema), plus the importance of returned board IDs. It does not describe the return format fully, but with no output schema, the ID mention provides useful 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 three concise sentences with no redundant words. Every sentence adds distinct information: listing behavior, name search, and the ID prerequisite.

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?

The tool is a straightforward list operation with full schema coverage and safe read annotations. The description communicates the core purpose and the key return value (board IDs). It could be slightly more explicit about the full return structure, but the combination of schema and description is adequate for an agent to select and invoke it.

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 100%, so the description does not need to duplicate parameter details. It does mention using `name` for searching, but that merely restates the schema's description. No additional semantic value is added for page, limit, or workspace_id.

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 uses the specific verb 'Lists' with the resource 'boards', and adds distinctive traits: 'newest use first', name search capability, and that results carry board IDs needed by other tools. This clearly differentiates it from sibling tools like monday_get_board or monday_list_workspaces.

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?

It implies usage as a prerequisite: 'The result carries board ids, which every other tool needs.' This tells the agent to use this tool first to discover board IDs before calling other monday.com tools. However, it does not explicitly name alternatives or exclusions, so it stops short of a full 5.

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