jira_create_sprint

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full burden. It discloses that the tool creates a sprint, returns a JSON string, and raises ValueError for read-only or unavailable client. However, it does not discuss permissions, duplicate checking, or side effects beyond creation.

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 follows a clean docstring format with a concise first line. The Args and Returns sections are useful, though some redundancy with the schema exists. Overall efficient.

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 presence of an output schema (not shown) and full parameter coverage, the description covers the core purpose, exceptions, and return type. It is mostly sufficient but could include more about the created sprint's properties.

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 each parameter is already described in the schema. The description's Args section merely restates parameter names and types, adding minimal value 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 clearly states 'Create Jira sprint for a board,' using a specific verb and resource. It distinguishes from sibling tools like jira_get_sprints_from_board or jira_update_sprint by focusing on 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 lacks explicit guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives. It mentions read-only mode errors but does not provide context for choosing this tool over jira_update_sprint or other board-related tools.

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