get_board

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

Annotations already provide readOnlyHint: true, indicating a safe read. The description adds value by stating that the response includes columns and label registry, giving richer behavioral context beyond the annotation.

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 (8 words), front-loaded with the action and resource, with no wasted words.

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?

Given a simple tool with one required parameter and an output schema, the description covers the essential scope (what is included). It does not discuss error states or permissions, but that is acceptable for a straightforward read operation.

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?

With 0% schema description coverage, the description carries full burden but does not explain the board_id parameter beyond its name. It adds no meaning about how to find or format board_id, so it falls short for the only required parameter.

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 'Get one board' with verb 'Get' and resource 'board', and adds that it includes columns and label registry. This distinguishes it from sibling tools like list_boards (which gets multiple boards) and get_card (which gets a card).

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 use when you need a specific board with all its details, naturally contrasting with list_boards. However, it lacks explicit when-not-to-use or mentions of alternatives, so it's clear but not fully prescriptive.

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