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

Adds context beyond annotations: returns null when no sprint is active, and handles terminology synonyms (focus, cycle, iteration, week). Annotations already declare read-only and non-destructive, so this is good value.

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?

Two sentences, front-loaded with usage trigger and outcome, then a helpful synonym note. No wasted words, though the synonym sentence is slightly tangential.

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 zero-param read tool with no output schema, the description covers usage, null-return behavior, and terminology. It could mention the return shape (sprint fields), but that's minor.

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?

No parameters exist, so baseline is 4. The description doesn't need to explain parameters, and it adds no irrelevant detail.

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 and resource: retrieves the currently-running sprint. It distinguishes from siblings like list_sprints (all sprints) by scoping to the active one.

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?

Explicitly names the trigger ('what sprint am I on?') and the condition for use (need the currently-running sprint). It implicitly excludes listing/creating sprints by focusing on the active one.

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