trello_get_user_boards

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden of disclosing behavioral traits. The description says 'all boards accessible to the current user,' but the schema shows a filter parameter with a default of 'open.' This could mislead an agent into thinking the tool returns all boards regardless of status, when by default it returns only open boards. The description omits any mention of the default filter behavior or how to request closed/all boards, which is a significant transparency gap.

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 elegantly concise: two short sentences that state the purpose and provide context. There is no redundant phrasing or filler. Every word earns its place.

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 tool's simplicity and complete schema coverage, the description covers the core purpose and when to use it. However, because there are no annotations and no output schema, the description's omission of the default filter behavior leaves an important contextual gap. The tool is fully usable, but an agent might mispredict defaults without reading the schema carefully. The description meets a minimum viable level but could be more helpful by mentioning the filter 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 input schema provides 100% description coverage for all three parameters, including clear descriptions for apiKey, token, and filter. The description adds no additional parameter context beyond what the schema already states. Since the schema fully documents the parameters, the baseline of 3 is appropriate; the description neither enhances nor degrades parameter understanding.

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's purpose: 'Get all boards accessible to the current user.' The verb 'Get' and the resource 'boards accessible to the current user' are specific and unambiguous. The additional phrase 'starting point for exploring your Trello workspace' adds useful context that distinguishes it from more targeted tools like get_board_details.

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 context for when to use the tool by calling it 'the starting point for exploring your Trello workspace.' It does not explicitly name alternatives or exclusion criteria, but the starting-point guidance is sufficient for an agent to understand this is the first call to make when orienting in Trello. Since no exclusions or alternatives are mentioned, the score is a 4 rather than a 5.

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