list_columns

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries the burden of behavioral disclosure. 'List' implies a read-only, non-destructive operation, and 'all' signals that no filtering is applied, but the description does not mention pagination, ordering, authentication requirements, or error behavior. These are meaningful gaps for a standalone read tool.

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 repeated information, fluff, or unnecessary detail. Every word contributes to the meaning.

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?

The tool is low-complexity with one required parameter and no output schema, and the description plus schema give the essential call shape. However, the absence of an output schema and any mention of return value structure or list behavior leaves some ambiguity for an agent. It is adequate but not 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% because projectId is documented as 'Project ID'. The description adds the phrase 'in a project', which lightly reinforces the link between the parameter and the operation, but it does not add meaningful semantics beyond what the schema already provides.

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 uses a specific verb ('List'), a specific resource ('columns'), and a clear scope ('in a project'). It is immediately distinguishable from sibling tools like list_projects, list_tasks, and list_subtasks because it names a distinct resource and scope.

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 intended use is implied by the phrasing 'List all columns in a project' — an agent can infer it is the right tool when it needs all columns for a project. However, it does not explicitly state when to prefer this over alternatives or mention any exclusions, so it stays at the implied-usage level.

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