jira_add_to_sprint

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

With no annotations, the description carries full burden but only mentions routing and scope details, not the actual behavior (e.g., side effects, required permissions, or whether it mutates data). The behavior is opaque.

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 short but includes unnecessary routing information that doesn't aid tool selection. It lacks a clear statement of purpose and is not optimally front-loaded.

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 description is severely incomplete given the tool's complexity. It omits the core function (adding issues to a sprint), input requirements, and any differentiation from sibling tools, leaving the agent unable to use it correctly.

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 single parameter 'arguments' has 0% schema coverage and the description merely labels it as 'JSON string of arguments' without explaining what keys are expected (e.g., issue IDs, sprint ID). No value added beyond the schema.

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 only restates the tool name as 'Jira connector operation add_to_sprint' without explaining what the operation actually does. It fails to specify that it adds issues to an existing sprint, leaving the purpose ambiguous.

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?

No guidance on when to use this tool versus other Jira sprint tools like jira_create_sprint, jira_start_sprint, or jira_get_sprint_issues. The description provides no context for tool selection.

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