get_board

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries full burden for behavioral disclosure. The verb 'Get' hints at a read-only operation, but it does not explicitly state that it has no side effects, nor does it mention permissions, error conditions, or what happens if the board ID is invalid. This lack of explicit transparency is a 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?

A single sentence that is direct and free of fluff. It conveys the essential information (action, resource, scope of return) without unnecessary detail, making it highly efficient for an agent to parse.

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 description mentions that the result includes columns and lanes, which gives some sense of the return content despite there being no output schema. However, it does not clarify whether these are all columns/lanes, any nesting, pagination, or error behavior. With no annotations or output schema, the description should provide more context but remains minimally adequate.

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 100%, so the schema already documents the parameter as 'Board ID'. The description says 'by ID', which is essentially redundant with the schema. It adds no new semantic meaning (e.g., type of ID, format requirements, or relationship to other parameters), so it meets the baseline but does not exceed it.

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 ('Get a single board by ID') and the resource (board), and adds that it returns columns and lanes, which distinguishes it from other tools like list_boards or get_space. The verb and resource are specific and unambiguous.

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 implies usage for fetching a specific board, but does not explicitly state when to use it versus alternatives (e.g., list_boards for enumerating boards, or get_space for spaces). No exclusions or conditional guidance are provided, leaving the agent to infer the context.

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