list_automations

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

The readOnlyHint annotation already establishes safety, and the description confirms a read-only listing action. No side effects or contradictions are present, though output shape is not described.

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?

A single, focused sentence communicates the action, target, and purpose without extraneous detail.

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 read-only listing tool, the description covers purpose and parameters adequately. The absence of an output schema is acceptable given the straightforward nature of the action, though a note on the returned automation list would be slightly richer.

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?

Both required parameters are documented with clear meanings and provenance hints (from list_boards / create_board and list_projects / create_project). Schema coverage is 100%, so the description adds sufficient context.

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?

States a specific verb ('List'), a specific resource ('automations on a board'), and a clear reason ('so you can see what already runs before adding another'). It is easily distinguished from the sibling create_automation tool.

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 explicitly indicates when to use the tool: before adding another automation. It does not name the alternative create_automation, but the context makes the intended workflow clear.

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