workboard_get_my_key_results_tool

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

No annotations provided, so description carries full burden. It discloses key behavioral traits: returns metric names, current values, targets, IDs; by default only current year results. Lacks details on pagination or ordering, but tool is simple with one optional parameter.

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 with front-loaded purpose, clear usage guidance, and parameter explanation. No wasted words or redundancy. Every sentence serves a distinct purpose.

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?

Given the tool's simplicity (one optional parameter, output schema exists), the description fully covers purpose, usage, parameter, and return content. It is sufficient for an AI agent to correctly invoke the tool.

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?

Input schema covers 100% of parameters (one boolean with description). The description adds usage context ('Set include_prior_years=True to see key results from previous years') but does not significantly extend beyond schema documentation. Baseline 3 is appropriate.

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?

Description explicitly states 'List all key results (metrics) the current user owns or has access to', clearly identifying the verb, resource, and scope. This distinguishes it from the sibling 'workboard_get_user_key_results_tool', which likely targets a different user.

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?

Provides clear recommended use: 'Use this to find metric IDs and see current progress before updating with workboard_update_key_result_tool.' Also explains the include_prior_years parameter behavior. However, it doesn't explicitly state when not to use it, though the context implies it's for the current user's own key results.

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