get_boards_paginate

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

Annotations only declare readOnlyHint, so the description usefully adds the pagination mechanism: pass the last board id as 'id' to advance, and the 500-per-page cap. It does not state ordering guarantees or behavior on an invalid/absent id, but the core pagination contract is disclosed.

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 tight sentence that front-loads the purpose and then the pagination instruction and cap. Every clause earns its place with no redundancy.

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 two-parameter read tool with a readOnlyHint and no output schema, the description covers the essential pagination flow an agent needs to call it correctly. It is only slightly thin on perPage and result-ordering expectations.

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 50%: 'id' is described in the schema and echoed in the description, while 'perPage' only carries a maximum constraint and is never explained in prose. The description reinforces the cursor semantics of 'id' but adds little beyond the 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?

States a specific verb (List) and resource (boards) plus the distinguishing trait (relative pagination). An agent can infer this is the paginated variant, though it never explicitly names the get_boards sibling it complements.

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 parenthetical 'for more than one page' implies the condition under which to prefer this over a plain list, but no alternative tool is named and no exclusions or prerequisites are given. Usage is left to inference.

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