get_sprint_summary

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 states it returns a compressed summary, omitting performance, authentication, or side effects. The read-only nature is implied but not explicit.

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 a single, well-structured sentence that conveys the core purpose and key feature (token optimization) upfront.

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's simplicity and no output schema, the description adequately explains what is returned (compressed summary with task counts by stage). However, it could specify the exact structure or fields of the output.

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 parameters are already documented in the schema. The description adds no extra meaning beyond what the schema provides (e.g., how 'current sprint' is determined from boardId and projectId).

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 tool retrieves a compressed summary of current sprint status with task counts by stage, and highlights its token optimization. This distinguishes it from sibling tools like get_active_sprint_overview or get_sprint_progress.

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 for a quick, token-efficient summary but lacks explicit guidance on when to prefer this tool over alternatives like get_active_sprint_overview or get_sprint_progress.

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