agile_listBoards

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

The annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true, idempotentHint=true, and destructiveHint=false, covering the safety profile. The description adds the API endpoint and the boardId extraction hint, but does not describe the return format or pagination behavior; this matches the 'with annotations' baseline where some extra context is present but not exhaustive.

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 two sentences: the first states the action and filters, the second gives a practical tip about boardId. Every sentence adds value, and there is no redundancy or filler.

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 read-only list tool with no output schema and 5 parameters, the description covers the core purpose and filtering, while the schema handles pagination and parameter details. The endpoint and boardId tip add useful context, though a note about the return format (array of boards) would have made it fully 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%, so every parameter is well-documented in the schema. The description's mention of filters ('name substring, type, projectKeyOrId') mirrors the schema without adding new meaning, so it provides little beyond what the schema already communicates.

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 explicitly says 'List Jira Software boards' and includes the API endpoint, which precisely specifies the verb and resource. It distinguishes itself from sibling board tools by focusing on listing and filtering, not on retrieving a single board's details or issues.

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 explains the filtering options (name substring, type, projectKeyOrId) and even hints at how to obtain a boardId from RapidBoard URLs, which is useful context. However, it does not explicitly state when to use this tool over the other board-related siblings, so it falls short of a 5.

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