Change Item Column Values

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

Annotations mark it as idempotent and not readOnly or destructive. The description adds that createLabelsIfMissing requires permission to change board structure. However, it does not disclose other behavioral traits like potential partial updates on failure or rate limits, which would be expected for a mutation 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?

The description is concise (two sentences) and front-loaded with the tool's purpose. The precondition is important but could be formatted more prominently (e.g., bold or separate line). Overall, it is not verbose and every sentence adds value.

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 simple mutation tool with 100% schema coverage and no output schema, the description covers the main purpose, precondition, and a key permission note. It could mention what the tool returns (e.g., the updated item) or error behaviors, but the core context is sufficient.

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 covers all 4 parameters with descriptions, achieving 100% schema coverage. The description adds concrete examples for the columnValues parameter (showing JSON structure for text, status, date, phone, email), which goes beyond the schema's generic description.

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 it changes column values of an item in a monday.com board, using a specific verb ('Change') and resource ('Item Column Values'). It distinguishes from siblings like move_item_to_group or update_column by focusing on column values and mentioning a required precondition for board-relation linking tasks.

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?

The description includes an explicit prerequisite: for board-relation linking, call link_board_items_workflow first. It does not mention alternative tools for similar tasks (e.g., create_item, update_column) or scenarios where this tool should not be used, but the precondition provides clear context.

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