Duplicate board

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

Goes well beyond the annotations: the copy lands in the parent board's Unsorted panel, is private unless the board is shared, the read-only link and editors are not copied, and every copied card counts against the free-plan limit. It also discloses the return payload (board_id, card_count), which no output schema provides.

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?

Three sentences, each carrying distinct information: what is copied, where it lands and what is excluded, then the billing/return consequences. No filler, and the core action is front-loaded.

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 output schema, the description still covers return values, placement, privacy, exclusions, and cost implications — everything needed to call a copying mutation correctly. Nothing material is missing.

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 titles and defaults are already documented; the description adds the missing placement semantics for parent_board_id by explaining the copy lands in that board's Unsorted panel, and clarifies what the call returns. Baseline 3 is exceeded because that placement detail is not in the schema.

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 ('Copy a board with everything on it, sub-boards included'), and names the scope of what is copied (cards, columns, comments, sub-boards). This clearly separates it from siblings like create_board, rename_board and export_board.

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?

Grounds usage with a familiar analogue ('Does what Duplicate in a board's menu does') and points to get_usage for the plan-limit consequence. It does not explicitly say when to prefer this over create_board plus manual copying, but the intended context is unambiguous.

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