get_card

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

With no annotations, the description should disclose behavioral traits. It only states the operation without mentioning error handling (e.g., card not found), rate limits, or whether the result is complete. The minimal description adds little beyond the obvious.

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 short and to the point with no extraneous words. However, it lacks structure (e.g., no bullet points or sections) and could benefit from additional context without being verbose.

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 simple input (1 required param) and no output schema, the description is incomplete. It does not explain return value, pagination, or error conditions. The agent lacks sufficient information to handle the tool robustly.

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 sole parameter card_id is required but the description adds no meaning about its format, source, or how to obtain it. Schema description coverage is 0%, and the description does not compensate, leaving the agent to infer from the parameter name alone.

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 'Get details of a single Trello card' uses a clear verb ('Get') and specific resource ('single Trello card'). It distinguishes from sibling tools like create_card, update_card, and archive_card by indicating a retrieval operation, but does not detail what specific details are returned.

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 no guidance on when to use this tool vs alternatives. It does not mention prerequisites, when not to use, or contrast with similar tools like get_board_cards or get_card_attachments.

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