zuuna_boards

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full behavioral burden. It discloses that only non-archived, non-private boards are returned and enumerates the entry fields (id, title, card key prefix, timestamps), which is valuable. However, it doesn't mention pagination, ordering, authentication requirements, or error behavior—moderate gaps for a list tool.

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?

Two sentences with no filler. The first sentence states the action and scope; the second lists the return fields and the follow-up tool. The description is front-loaded and every word earns its place.

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 zero-parameter list tool with no output schema or annotations, the description covers the scope, filters, return fields, and the next logical step. Minor omissions like pagination and ordering are acceptable for a simple board list, so the description is adequately 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?

The input schema is empty, so there are no parameters to describe. With zero parameters, the baseline is 4, and the description doesn't introduce any parameter-related confusion or missing guidance.

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 states a specific verb ('List') and resource ('boards of the token's organization') with explicit filters (non-archived, non-private). It also distinguishes itself from the sibling zuuna_board by noting that the returned id is for use with that tool, making it clear this is the collection-level list.

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?

Provides clear context about what the endpoint returns and directly points the agent to zuuna_board for single-board operations. It doesn't explicitly discuss when to avoid using this tool, but the collection-vs-single-board distinction is sufficient for routing between the two key siblings.

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