list_columns

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full behavioral burden. It discloses the returned fields (order, color, WIP limit), but does not explicitly state that this is a read-only operation, nor does it mention permissions or side effects. The implied read-only nature from '列出' is helpful but not explicit.

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 a single sentence that is front-loaded with the verb and resource. It contains no redundant or filler content, and every phrase (order, color, WIP limit) adds useful return information.

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 simple list tool with zero parameters and no output schema, the description adequately communicates the returned column attributes. However, it does not state that the operation is read-only or that no side effects occur, which would be more important given the absence of annotations.

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?

The tool has zero parameters, so the rubric baseline is 4. There is no parameter semantics to add beyond the empty schema, and the description appropriately does not discuss inputs.

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 '列出' (list) and resource '所有栏目（列）' plus the returned attributes order, color, and WIP limit. It clearly identifies what the tool does, but does not differentiate itself from siblings like board_config or board_snapshot, which may also expose column information.

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 provides no when-to-use guidance, no alternatives, and no prerequisites. An agent must infer that this tool is for reading column metadata rather than for any configuration or mutation task.

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