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

With readOnlyHint/idempotentHint/destructiveHint already declaring the safety profile, the description usefully adds the displayId-referencing convention and default/max page sizing. It does not, however, say how results are ordered, what the pagination envelope looks like, or how many results trigger a next page.

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?

Four compact sentences, front-loaded with purpose and identity convention, then the disambiguation rule, then the alternative tool, then defaults. No redundant restatement of the schema.

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 an 11-parameter list tool with no output schema, the description supplies the result-shape hint (each story carries a displayId) and pagination defaults, which covers most of what an agent needs. Ordering and total-count semantics remain unstated.

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 coverage is 64%, and the description closes the most dangerous gap: it explains that status accepts either a category or a board column name and that stageId is an exact column. It also states defaults (page 1, limit 20, max 50). Type, priority, epicId, assigneeId and backlog are left to schema descriptions, which is acceptable at this coverage.

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 ("List stories in a Stride project") plus scope (optional filters), and distinguishes itself from siblings by naming stride.get_story for full detail and stride.list_workflow_stages as the source of column names.

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?

Gives explicit guidance on which filter to use for each intent (status category vs stageId exact column) and routes to stride.get_story for acceptance criteria. It does not mention stride.search_stories, which an agent could reasonably confuse with this tool, so it stops short of full alternative coverage.

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