member_boards

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full burden and only discloses one behavioral trait: results are limited to boards visible to the configured token. It omits other useful context such as pagination, error handling, and authentication requirements.

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 with no wasted words, efficiently packing the primary use case and a key constraint.

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 simple read tool with no annotations or output schema, the description covers when to use it and a visibility limitation, but it leaves gaps regarding what is returned (e.g., list format, pagination) and error behavior. It is adequate but not fully complete.

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 100%, so the schema already fully documents all three parameters. The description adds no extra meaning beyond what the schema provides, which is the baseline expectation.

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 the resource (boards) and the relationship (associated with a known Trello member) with acceptable specificity. It does not explicitly name a sibling tool to differentiate against, but the 'known member' qualifier implicitly distinguishes it from list_boards and member_get.

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 provides a clear context for use ('when you need boards associated with a known Trello member by id, username, or me') and notes a visibility constraint. However, it does not explicitly state when not to use this tool or name alternative siblings.

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