listMondayBoards

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

No annotations are present, so the description must carry the full burden of behavioral transparency. It implies a read-only operation via 'Retrieves', but it does not disclose any potential side effects, authentication requirements, pagination, or data scope limitations. The phrase 'associated with the authenticated user' hints at auth context but is insufficient.

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, well-structured sentence that front-loads the key action and resource. It is concise with no unnecessary 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?

With no parameters, annotations, or output schema, the description is the sole source of context. It explains the basic purpose but lacks details about the return format (e.g., board IDs, names), pagination, or any limitations. Given the simplicity of a zero-parameter read tool, this is minimally adequate but leaves gaps.

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?

There are zero parameters, and the baseline for 0 params is 4. The description does not need to add parameter-level detail, but the phrase 'associated with the authenticated user' adds implicit context about how the tool uses authentication.

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 ('Retrieves') and the resource ('a list of boards') along with the context ('associated with the authenticated user from Monday'). However, it does not explicitly distinguish itself from the sibling tool 'readMondayBoard', which would be useful for clarity.

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?

No guidance is provided on when to use this tool versus alternatives. With many sibling tools (e.g., readMondayBoard, listNotionPages), the description lacks any mention of selection criteria, exclusions, or complementary tools.

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