get_whiteboard

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure. It only says 'Get whiteboard details including content' and does not mention that it is a read-only operation, any authentication needs, return format, or error behavior. For a retrieval tool, this is minimal transparency.

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, concise sentence that front-loads the verb and resource. 'Get whiteboard details including content' is efficient, has no filler, and communicates the essential purpose without unnecessary detail.

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 low-complexity tool with one parameter and no output schema, the description is acceptable but minimal. It mentions 'including content' but does not clarify what other details are returned or how it handles missing whiteboards. Adequate for a simple get, but lacks depth.

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?

The schema description covers 100% of parameters (id as 'The whiteboard UUID'), so the baseline is 3. The description itself adds no extra meaning to the parameter, relying entirely on the schema for parameter semantics.

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 action (Get) and resource (whiteboard details) and adds scope with 'including content'. It distinguishes the tool from siblings like list_whiteboards, update_whiteboard, and delete_whiteboard, which have different purposes.

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?

The description implies usage when you need details of a specific whiteboard, but provides no explicit guidance on when to use it versus alternatives like list_whiteboards, nor any exclusions or prerequisites. The context is clear from the name and parameter, but no direct comparison to siblings is given.

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