Get Lists

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full burden. It states the tool retrieves all lists, which is straightforward. However, it does not disclose nuances like whether closed lists are included, ordering, or pagination. For a simple retrieval, it is adequate but not rich.

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 sentence that is front-loaded with the verb and resource. Every word contributes meaning with no redundancy.

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 tool with one optional parameter and no output schema, the description is reasonably complete. It states the action and scope, and the schema covers the parameter. However, it does not describe the return structure, but this is a minor gap for such a simple list retrieval.

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%, with boardId clearly documented as 'ID of the Trello board (uses the active/default board if not provided)'. The tool description adds no additional parameter meaning beyond this, so a baseline of 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?

The description uses a specific verb 'retrieve' with a clear resource 'all lists' and scope 'from the specified board'. It clearly distinguishes from sibling tools like get_cards_by_list_id (cards, not lists) and add_list_to_board (creation).

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 when to use it: whenever you need all lists from a board. It provides clear context but does not explicitly name alternatives or exclusions, such as using get_cards_by_list_id for cards. This is a minor gap for a simple read tool.

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