list_card_children

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 behavioral disclosure. It only says 'list', which implies a read-only operation returning a collection, but it does not disclose anything about pagination, ordering, the structure of returned items, or any side effects. For a tool with zero annotation coverage, this is a significant 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, five words, with no fluff. The entire description is the purpose statement and is front-loaded. Every token 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?

The tool is simple (1 parameter, no output schema), and the description is adequate for calling it correctly. However, it doesn't specify what the response looks like (e.g., list of card objects vs IDs), which could matter to an agent. Given the lack of annotations and output schema, a bit more detail would improve completeness, but it's minimally viable.

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 already documents card_id as an integer with description 'Parent card ID' and 100% coverage. The description adds no additional meaning beyond the schema's parameter description, so the baseline of 3 applies.

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 states a specific verb and resource: 'List child cards of a parent card.' It clearly identifies the operation and differentiates it from siblings like list_cards (which lists all cards) and add_card_child/remove_card_child (which modify hierarchy). An agent can immediately tell what this tool does without opening the schema.

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 context is clear: use this when you have a parent card and want its children. However, there is no explicit guidance on when NOT to use it or when to prefer a sibling like list_cards. The description implies the use case but doesn't spell out exclusions or alternatives.

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