get_agile_sprint

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries full burden. It only states the plugin requirement and that the tool 'gets details', but does not disclose any behavioral traits such as error handling, authentication needs, or side effects. For a read-only tool the disclosure is minimal.

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, no filler, front-loaded with the core action. Every word 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?

The tool is simple (get by two IDs) and no output schema exists. The description covers the core action and a prerequisite, but does not hint at the structure of the returned details or behavior if the sprint is not found. This is adequate but could be improved to be fully 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 100% (both parameters documented). The description does not add any additional parameter semantics beyond the schema, so baseline score of 3 applies.

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?

Clearly states the verb 'Gets' and resource 'details of a specific sprint', differentiating it from sibling tools like list_agile_sprints (which lists) and assign_issue_to_sprint (which assigns). Also mentions the required plugin as a prerequisite.

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 when to use (need sprint details) but does not explicitly state when not to use or mention alternatives. The plugin requirement is a usage condition, but no guidance on choosing between this and list_agile_sprints.

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