Copy Card

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full burden, and it does disclose the important default that all properties (checklists, attachments, comments, labels) are copied unless overridden. It omits any mention of permissions required, side effects on the source card, or whether the copy produces a new card ID.

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?

A single front-loaded sentence with the verb and scope first and no filler. It is slightly thin for a tool with six parameters but wastes no 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?

With no annotations and no output schema, an agent lacks the safety profile and return-value information, and the description does not compensate for either. It covers what is copied but not what comes back or what permissions are needed.

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 all six parameters are already documented in the schema, establishing a baseline of 3. The description adds only a general statement about default copying that loosely maps to keepFromSource, without new syntax or constraint details.

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 (copy/duplicate) and resource (Trello card) plus the scope of destinations ('any list, even on a different board'). It does not explicitly distinguish itself from the obvious sibling move_card, which is the main risk of confusion for an agent.

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 'even on a different board' clause implies a use case (cross-board duplication) but the description never says when to copy versus move, nor mentions any prerequisites. Usage is only implied rather than stated.

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