assign_issue_to_sprint

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

The description discloses the key behavior of removing from sprint when null is passed, but lacks details on permissions, side effects (e.g., overwriting current assignments), or error conditions. Without annotations, more behavioral context would be beneficial.

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 sentences, no unnecessary words, and front-loads the core action. Every part earns its place.

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, the description could mention what the tool returns on success/failure or require specific permissions. It is adequate for a simple assignment but lacks completeness on error handling and prerequisites beyond the plugin.

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 100%, so the schema already documents both parameters. The description adds value by clarifying that passing null removes the issue from the sprint, which is not obvious from the schema alone.

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 the action 'assign an issue to a sprint' and includes the ability to remove by passing null. It distinguishes from sibling tools like 'create_agile_sprint' and 'list_agile_sprints' which serve different purposes.

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 mentions a prerequisite (RedmineUP Agile plugin) but does not provide guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives or when not to use it. No explicit usage context is given.

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