Transfer global custom field to board

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

The term 'transfer' suggests moving, but it's unclear if this is a move or copy operation, and no details on side effects, permissions, or reversibility. With no annotations, the description fails to disclose important behavioral traits.

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 short (two sentences), but the first sentence is a raw URL which is not informative. The repetition of the tool name is redundant. Could be more compact while adding substance.

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 no annotations, no output schema, and nested parameters, the description is inadequate. It doesn't explain input format, output, or differentiate from multiple similar transfer tools in the sibling list.

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 0%. The description only mentions 'Body: application/json' without explaining the path parameter 'id' (the custom field ID) or the body parameter 'boardId' (the target board). It adds no semantic value beyond the raw schema.

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 action ('Transfer global custom field to board') and resource. It specifies the HTTP method and endpoint. However, it does not explicitly differentiate from sibling tools like weeek_transfer_custom_field_to_board or weeek_transfer_global_custom_field_to_project, leaving ambiguity about the distinction between global and non-global fields.

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 tool versus alternatives, no prerequisites or exclusions. The description only states the function without context.

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