List or search items on a board

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint and openWorldHint, and the description adds that results are paginated via cursor, filters are applied, and column values are rendered as readable text. This gives useful behavioral context beyond the schema, though it doesn't discuss rate limits or detailed response structure.

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 two sentences, front-loading the core behavior and then adding the prerequisite and pagination note. Every sentence earns its place with no wasted words.

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 read-only paginated listing tool, the description captures the essential flow: board scoping, readable column values, filtering, and cursoring. The lack of an output schema is mitigated by the 'readable text' mention, and the prerequisite to get board metadata is included. It could be more explicit about alternative tools, but overall it's sufficient.

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 schema already documents all six parameters. The description adds minimal extra value by mentioning filters and cursor for pagination, but it doesn't explain group, limit, or search beyond their 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 tool returns a page of items from a single board with column values as readable text, using a specific verb and resource scope. It also distinguishes from broader listing tools by emphasizing 'from one board' and the readable-text transformation.

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 description advises calling monday_get_board first to learn column ids and labels, which is a clear prerequisite. However, it does not explicitly name alternative tools like monday_get_items or state when to avoid this tool, so differentiation is left mostly to inference.

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