update_card

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

No annotations are provided, so the description must carry the full burden of behavioral disclosure. It only states 'Update one or more fields', but does not explain mutations like side effects, required permissions, or that unspecified fields remain unchanged. For a mutation tool, this is insufficient.

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 a single concise sentence, which is appropriate for a simple action. However, in the context of 11 parameters and no schema descriptions, it is overly concise and fails to provide necessary details without becoming overly 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 high parameter count (11) and no output schema, the description should explain the update behavior (e.g., partial update), return value, and error handling. It lacks these details, making it incomplete for an agent to use effectively.

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 0%, yet the description adds no meaning to any of the 11 parameters. It does not explain what each field does (e.g., 'position' accepts 'top', 'bottom', or a number), leaving the agent without guidance beyond the schema types.

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 action ('Update') and the resource ('fields on a Trello card'), providing a specific verb+resource combination. It distinguishes from siblings like 'create_card' or 'delete_card' by focusing on modification, though it does not explicitly contrast with similar update tools like 'archive_card' or 'move_card'.

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 versus alternatives. For example, it does not explain when to use 'update_card' instead of 'archive_card' or 'move_card', nor does it mention prerequisites or context.

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