azure_list_iterations

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

No annotations are provided, so the description must carry the full burden of behavioral disclosure. 'Lista' implies a read-only operation, but the description does not explicitly state that it has no side effects, nor does it mention pagination, ordering, or what fields are returned. It adds no behavioral context beyond the tool's name.

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, concise sentence: 'Lista todas as iterations (sprints) do time'. It contains no redundant information, is front-loaded with the verb and resource, and earns every word.

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 with one optional parameter, but the description does not explain what the returned list contains (e.g., iteration names, dates, status) or mention the default team behavior (though the schema hint covers it). It is adequate but leaves gaps in return structure and edge cases.

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?

The input schema has 100% coverage for its one parameter 'team', which is already described as optional with a default team. The tool description repeats 'do time' but does not add any new meaning about the parameter beyond what the schema provides, so the baseline of 3 is appropriate.

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 uses the verb 'Lista' (Lists) with a specific resource 'iterations (sprints)' and scopes it to 'do time' (of the team). This distinguishes it from sibling tools like azure_get_current_iteration, azure_create_iteration, and azure_delete_iteration.

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 provides no guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives. It does not mention scenarios such as retrieving a single iteration (use azure_get_current_iteration) or creating/updating iterations, leaving the agent to infer usage solely from the tool name.

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