list_boards

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

No annotations provided, so description must disclose behavior. It describes the properties of returned boards but does not mention that it is a read-only operation, any side effects, authorization needs, or rate limits. The absence of such details lowers transparency.

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?

Description is two well-structured sentences. First sentence states main function. Second sentence provides details and usage context. No redundancy or 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?

Given the simplicity of the tool (one parameter, no output schema), the description covers the key aspects: input source, output characteristics, and usage scenarios. It could mention response format (array), but the list of board properties compensates.

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 covers the only parameter with a description. Description adds value by explaining that gameId comes from list_games output, which helps the agent obtain the correct input. This extra context justifies a score above baseline.

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?

Description clearly states it lists all leaderboards under a given game, and distinguishes from siblings by explaining its role in finding board IDs before using get_sdk_snippet or get_board_top_n. It also specifies the information each board contains, which provides 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?

Explicitly advises when to use: to find a board's id before generating a snippet or reading standings, or to show existing boards. It also references list_games as the source of the gameId. However, it does not explicitly state when not to use or compare to all sibling tools.

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