list_work_item_property_options

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

Annotations (readOnlyHint=true) already indicate no side effects. The description adds return type but does not disclose pagination, ordering, or any other behavioral details. The return type is helpful but not comprehensive.

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 front-loaded with the main purpose, followed by parameter and return documentation. It is slightly verbose due to the structured format but remains clear and free of redundancy. Could be shortened slightly without losing clarity.

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 the tool has only 3 parameters (1 required), no nested objects, and an output schema, the description covers the essential functionality and return type. It could mention pagination or default behavior, but it is largely sufficient for a list operation.

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 description provides clear explanations for property_id and project_id (UUIDs, scope hint), which the schema lacks (no descriptions). params is only vaguely described as 'Optional query parameters', leaving it underdocumented. With 0% schema coverage, the description compensates well for required params.

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 'List options for a work item property' clearly states the verb 'list' and the resource 'options', distinguishing it from sibling tools like create/update/delete options and retrieve single option. It is 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?

No guidance is provided on when to use this tool versus alternatives such as retrieve_work_item_property_option (for single option) or list_work_item_properties (for properties). The description does not mention exclusions or prerequisites.

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