zentao_list_stories

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 only mentions 'list' without confirming it is read-only, specifying return format, or noting rate limits or authentication needs. The safety profile (non-destructive) is not explicitly stated.

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?

Single sentence, front-loaded with purpose, and efficiently lists key filtering capabilities. 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?

Given no annotations, no output schema, and six optional parameters, the description is too brief. It omits pagination behavior (limit parameter details), return format, prerequisites (e.g., authentication), and any error conditions. For a listing tool, this is insufficient.

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 baseline is 3. The description adds minimal value beyond the schema—it groups parameters into query-by and filter categories, but does not explain the semantics of product, project, execution in ZenTao context or provide usage examples.

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 explicitly states the tool lists ZenTao stories and specifies the query dimensions (product, execution, project) and filters (status, assignedTo). This clearly differentiates it from sibling tools like zentao_get_story (single story) or zentao_create_story (creation).

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 usage by listing available filters but does not explicitly state when to use this tool versus alternatives (e.g., zentao_get_story for a single story). It lacks when-not or alternative suggestions.

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