trello_get_list_cards

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden. It fails to disclose that the default filter is 'open' (excluding archived cards) despite the schema, and it doesn't mention response format, pagination, or authentication behavior. The phrase 'Get all cards' could mislead agents into thinking closed cards are included by default.

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 two concise sentences that both earn their place: one states the core function, the other provides usage context. No unnecessary words or repetition of schema details.

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?

The tool has 5 parameters and no output schema, yet the description doesn't explain the return format or the default filter behavior. While the purpose is clear, important operational details are left to the schema and the agent's inference.

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 100% as every parameter has a detailed description (e.g., listId pattern, filter enum with defaults). The description adds no parameter-level semantics beyond the schema, so the baseline of 3 is appropriate.

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 'Get all cards in a specific Trello list' with a specific verb and resource, and the phrase 'workflow column' adds useful context. It inherently distinguishes from sibling tools like trello_get_board_cards, which operate at the board level.

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 a clear use case: 'Use this to see all tasks/items in a workflow column.' This tells the agent when to use it, but it doesn't mention exclusions or alternatives (e.g., when to use trello_get_board_cards for board-level retrieval).

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