list_boards

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries the transparency burden and discloses key behavior: it only lists boards the authenticated account can open, and it returns board ids, names, and URLs. It does not explain the closed-board behavior behind include_closed, but the listing scope is clear and the operation is evidently read-only.

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?

Three short, action-first sentences with no filler. The entry-point sentence adds real context without bloating the definition.

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 list tool with an output schema, the description conveys auth scope, return fields, and its role in the broader workflow. A note about include_closed and the default exclusion of closed boards would make it fully complete, but that is a minor omission given the self-evident parameter name and default.

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 description gives no guidance about the only parameter, include_closed, and the schema has no description text for it either. Because schema description coverage is 0%, the description should compensate but does not; an agent must infer meaning from the parameter name and default value.

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 names the exact operation ('List every Trello board'), the resource ('boards'), and the auth scope ('the authenticated account can open'). It also positions the tool as the entry point for all other board-scoped tools, so an agent can distinguish it from siblings like get_board_info or list_cards.

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 explicitly says this is the entry point for every other tool and that they all need a board id or name. That gives clear when-to-use context, though it does not name alternatives or 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.