trello_search

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 whether the tool is read-only, required permissions, response format, pagination, or filtering details. The sparse description leaves agents uninformed about behavioral traits beyond the basic search action.

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 very concise (two short sentences) with no wasted words. However, conciseness comes at the cost of missing important details, making it only moderately effective. Every sentence serves a purpose but coverage is thin.

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?

No output schema and no annotations. The description provides basic search intent but lacks completeness: no return format, no mention of what fields are searched (names, descriptions), no parameters guidance, and no behavioral details. For a search tool with three parameters, this is inadequate.

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 only 33% (board described), and the description adds no meaning to parameters. It does not explain query syntax, board alias details, or allProjectBoards usage. For a search tool with three parameters, the description fails to compensate for low schema coverage.

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 the verb 'Search' and resources 'cards and boards', making the purpose clear. However, it does not differentiate from siblings like trello_get_card, trello_list_boards, or trello_list_lists, which also access cards/boards. The phrase 'Scoped to project boards by default' adds context but not distinction.

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. The description only mentions default scoping but does not explain when to prefer search over specific retrieval tools (e.g., get_card, list_boards). No exclusions or prerequisites are stated.

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