Create board

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

Annotations already declare write (readOnly=false), non-idempotent, non-destructive, open-world behavior, so the bar is lower. The description still adds genuine value by disclosing required OAuth scopes (boards:write, and boards:write_secret specifically for SECRET boards), which the agent cannot infer from annotations alone.

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?

Two tight sentences with the operation front-loaded and the scope caveat second; no filler or redundancy.

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 write tool with full annotation coverage and 100% schema descriptions, the entry covers purpose, auth scope, and the SECRET exception. It omits error behavior (e.g. duplicate board names) and the returned identifier, but with no output schema that omission is minor.

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%, so baseline is 3, but the description adds parameter-linked meaning: choosing privacy=SECRET changes the required scope to boards:write_secret. That links a schema enum to an auth consequence the schema itself does not mention.

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?

States a specific verb and resource ("Create a new board") plus the target account, which cleanly separates it from the update/delete/list/get board siblings. The scope clause further qualifies the operation for SECRET boards.

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 never states when to choose this tool over alternatives (e.g. update_board, create_board_section) or any precondition beyond scope. The scope line is auth context rather than a when-to-use guideline, so guidance is essentially absent.

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