Get Recent Activity

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full behavioral burden, yet it discloses nothing about scope of results, the default 10-item cap, the raw vs trimmed reply behavior, or pagination/ordering. Only the word 'recent' gestures at freshness, and the implicit read-only nature of 'Fetch' is the sole signal.

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 no filler, appropriately sized for a simple lookup. It errs toward under-specification rather than verbosity, but structurally it is clean.

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?

Five optional parameters, no annotations and no output schema mean the description must carry safety and return-shape context, and it does not. It never states what an 'activity' record contains or what the default-board fallback means, leaving real gaps for the agent.

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 five parameters (raw, limit, since, before, boardId) are already documented in the schema; baseline 3 applies. The description adds no meaning beyond that, not even connecting 'recent' to the since/before window.

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 ('Fetch') and resource ('recent activity') scoped to 'the Trello board', so an agent immediately knows what it retrieves. No sibling tool covers activity, so differentiation is moot, but the description could clarify what counts as 'activity' (actions/comments/moves).

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?

There is no when-to-use guidance, no prerequisite (e.g. an active board), and no mention of how this differs from card history or comment tools. The agent must infer that this is a board-level audit feed.

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