Get All Labels

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the behavioral disclosure burden. 'List' signals a non-mutating read operation, and 'all labels on a board' clarifies board-level scope. It does not mention auth or side effects, but none are critical for this simple read operation, and the output schema covers return structure.

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. Every word contributes meaning, and there is no repetition of the tool name or title.

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 the tool's low complexity, one required parameter, and the presence of an output schema, the description is nearly complete. It could explicitly state that board-level labels are returned regardless of card usage, but the wording is sufficient for an agent to invoke the tool correctly.

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?

The schema has 0% description coverage, so the description must compensate. 'On a board' correctly links boardId to the board context, but it does not explain the ID format or how to obtain a valid boardId. The self-explanatory parameter name makes this minimally adequate.

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 clear resource ('labels'), and a scope ('on a board'). It is immediately distinguishable from sibling label-related tools like create_label, update_label, delete_label, add_label_to_card, and remove_label_from_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 clearly indicates the tool is for retrieving all labels associated with a board. It does not explicitly name alternatives or exclusions, but the read-vs-mutation pattern among sibling tools makes the intended use clear enough.

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