Update a card

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

With no annotations, the description reveals key side effects: idList moves the card, closed=true archives it, and idAttachmentCover sets cover. This adds transparency beyond the bare parameter names, though it does not cover all behaviors (e.g., updating desc, name).

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 extremely concise: one sentence (or two short ones) that front-loads the main purpose and then lists key actions. No redundant information.

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 no output schema and 9 parameters, the description covers the most critical behavioral nuances (move, archive, due dates, cover). It does not mention return values or error conditions, but the level of detail is sufficient for a simple update tool.

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?

All 9 parameters are already documented in the schema (100% coverage). The description adds value by explicitly mapping parameters to actions ('idList to MOVE', 'closed=true to ARCHIVE'), which is helpful context beyond the schema's basic descriptions.

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 'Update a card' and enumerates specific actions (move, archive, set due dates, set cover), distinguishing it from sibling tools like create_card or delete_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?

No explicit guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives such as create_card for new cards or delete_card for removal. The description implies usage for modifying existing card attributes but does not clarify exclusions.

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