list_boards

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

With no annotations, the description carries the burden of behavioral disclosure. It states the operation is 'List all' which implies read-only, and adds scope ('accessible to the user'). However, it does not mention the default filter behavior (which the schema says is 'open'), nor any pagination or rate-limit considerations. This is adequate but not rich.

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 one sentence, front-loaded with the core purpose. Every word earns its place, and it is highly scannable. It avoids unnecessary detail while still conveying the main use case.

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 three parameters and no output schema, the description is mostly complete. It tells the agent what the tool does and when to use it. It does not describe the return format or default filter, but these are less critical given the simplicity. It could benefit from a note about the default filter being 'open'.

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%, so the baseline is 3. The description adds a high-level phrase 'filter by status' that paraphrases the filter parameter but does not add information beyond the schema. It adds no additional meaning for apiKey or token beyond their schema descriptions.

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 tool lists all Trello boards accessible to the user, with an optional filter by status. This is a specific verb+resource+scope combination. However, it does not explicitly distinguish itself from the sibling tool trello_get_user_boards, which may serve a similar purpose, so it does not fully earn a 5.

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 provides clear usage context: 'Use this to see all boards you have access to, or filter by status.' This tells the agent when to use the tool. It doesn't explicitly mention alternatives or exclusions, but the context is clear enough for a simple listing operation.

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