Get Artboards

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint, idempotentHint, and destructiveHint=false, so the safety profile is fully covered. The description adds nothing beyond that — no note on return volume, ordering, or pagination for a list-all call.

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?

A single five-word sentence with no waste, but it errs toward under-specification rather than useful brevity — there is essentially no content to front-load.

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 output schema, the description should explain what 'artboard information' means, since that phrasing implies a return shape the agent cannot otherwise predict. It also fails to resolve the all-vs-index tension, leaving the tool under-described for its scope.

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 coverage is 100%, including a detailed coordinate_system description, so the schema carries all parameter meaning. The description contributes zero additional parameter context, which matches the baseline 3 for fully-covered schemas.

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?

States a verb and resource (get artboards information), which is minimally clear, but 'all' is misleading given an index parameter exists for fetching a single artboard, and nothing distinguishes it from the sibling manage_artboards.

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 on when to use this versus manage_artboards or get_document_structure. The schema hints that get_document_info is relevant for the coordinate system, but the description itself never routes the agent.

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