Create Card

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

With no annotations provided, the description must carry the full burden of behavioral disclosure. It merely states the action without revealing side effects, permissions, idempotency, or return value. The agent learns nothing about what happens on success or failure, making this a significant gap.

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 a single, front-loaded sentence that immediately states the action. It is concise and free of filler. However, it omits critical context that would justify a 5, but for being a simple one-liner it is appropriately sized.

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?

For a create operation with four parameters (three required) and an output schema, the description is far too sparse. It does not explain the meaning of required fields, the optional description purpose, or what the tool returns. Even a minimal agent would struggle to use it correctly without external knowledge.

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 0%, so the description should compensate by explaining the parameters (board_name, list_name, card_name, description). It does not mention any of them. The agent must rely solely on the parameter names, which is inadequate for correct invocation.

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 clearly states the verb 'Create' and the resource 'card', and it narrows the scope with 'in a list on a board.' This differentiates it from siblings like create_list (list creation) and update_card (modification). It lacks an explicit contrast with those siblings, so it doesn't fully earn a 5.

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 guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives like update_card or move_card. The description does not mention prerequisites (e.g., board and list must exist) or exclusions. An agent has to infer usage solely from the name and description, which is insufficient.

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