list_monday_items

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

With no annotations, the description bears full responsibility for behavioral disclosure. It only states the tool lists items, omitting key traits such as pagination behavior, default limit (50 from schema), error handling for invalid board_ids, and authentication via api_key. This is insufficient for an agent to understand the tool's behavior.

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 very concise at one sentence, front-loading the action. It is well-structured with no unnecessary words, but it is potentially too brief, which affects completeness. Still, it earns a high score for efficiency.

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 is a list operation with 3 parameters and no output schema, the description lacks critical context: no mention of pagination, default limit, authentication requirements, or expected return format. This makes it incomplete for an agent to use effectively.

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 description coverage is 67% (board_id and limit have descriptions, api_key does not). The tool description adds no additional meaning beyond the schema; it does not explain board_id format, limit effects, or the role of api_key. For mid-range coverage, the description should compensate but fails to do so.

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 clearly states the tool lists items (rows) in a Monday.com board, using a specific verb and resource. However, it does not differentiate from the sibling 'search_monday_items' which likely provides filtered results, so it loses a point for lack of distinction.

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 usage guidelines are provided. The description does not specify when to use this tool versus alternatives like search_monday_items, nor does it mention prerequisites or context for use beyond the schema's required board_id.

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