get_user_boards

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure. It only states the action ('get boards') and reveals nothing about read-only nature, authentication requirements, pagination, or response format. This is a significant gap for a tool that likely accesses user data.

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 a single, complete sentence with no redundant words. It is front-loaded with the action and target, making it highly concise and efficient.

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 simple one-parameter tool with no output schema and no annotations, the description is adequate but leaves gaps. It does not explain what the response contains, whether it returns public or private boards, or how to distinguish from the sibling 'get_my_boards'. The description is minimally viable but lacks context.

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% (the 'username' parameter has a description), so the baseline is 3. The tool description adds no additional meaning beyond the schema, which already describes the parameter as 'Pinterest username'.

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 uses a specific verb ('Get') and resource ('boards') with a clear target ('a Pinterest user'). It distinguishes itself from siblings like 'get_board' (singular) and 'get_my_boards' (own boards) by indicating it fetches boards for any specified user.

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 explicit guidance on when to choose this tool over alternatives such as 'get_my_boards' or 'get_board'. Usage is only implied by the tool name and schema, which require a 'username' parameter. There is no mention of when not to use it.

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