Runn: create milestone

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

No annotations are provided, so the description must disclose behavioral traits. It states the operation is a POST request and mentions required fields, but does not discuss permissions, response format, idempotency, or side effects beyond creation. This gives some transparency but lacks depth.

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 two concise sentences, front-loading the main purpose and following with required inputs and icon options. No wasted words.

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 five-parameter create tool with no annotations and no output schema, the description provides the key requirements and endpoint, but leaves out nuances like the optional note, projectId semantics, and any response behavior. It is minimally sufficient but could be more complete.

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 description coverage is low (20% of params). The description repeats that title, icon, and date are required (already in schema) and restates the icon preset/emoji option (already in schema's icon description). It adds no new meaning for projectId or note, so it fails to compensate for low 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?

The description clearly identifies the action (create), the resource (milestone), and the target (project), and includes the REST endpoint. It distinguishes from sibling tools like runn_update_milestone and runn_list_milestones through the verb 'create'.

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 description implies the tool is for creating milestones, but does not explicitly mention alternatives or when not to use it (e.g., for updates, use runn_update_milestone). It provides clear context of its purpose, but no exclusionary guidance.

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