List boards

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

The annotations already establish that this is a read-only, idempotent, non-destructive operation. The description adds useful behavior beyond the annotations: it explains the ordering, the exclusion of trashed boards, and the meaning of parent_board_id in the response when no parent is supplied.

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 front-loaded with the core purpose and every sentence adds useful information about hierarchy, ordering, or exclusions. It is slightly repetitive between the opening phrase and the second sentence, but remains efficient overall.

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 only two optional parameters, full schema coverage, and annotations covering safety, the description is largely complete for correct invocation. Since there is no output schema, it helpfully names returned fields and ordering, but it could say more about pagination or the exact response shape.

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 the baseline is 3. The description still adds semantic value by explaining the nesting behavior of parent_board_id and what that field means in the answer, although it does not elaborate on the limit parameter beyond what the schema already states.

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?

The description states a specific verb and resource: it lists boards one level down, by default from Home, and returns title, ID, and link. The hierarchical scope distinguishes it from sibling tools such as get_board, search_boards, and list_recent_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?

It tells the agent how to walk down the board hierarchy by passing a board id as parent_board_id and clarifies the default when omitted. However, it does not explicitly compare this tool with alternatives such as search_boards, list_recent_boards, or list_trash.

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