jira_get_sprints_from_board

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

No annotations are provided, and the description does not disclose behavioral traits beyond what is in the input schema. It does not mention rate limits, authentication requirements, or side effects. The return format (JSON string of sprint objects) is stated, but additional context is minimal.

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 concise with no wasted words. It is structured with a clear header, parameter list, and return type. Information is front-loaded, making it easy to scan.

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 and full schema description coverage, the description adequately covers parameters and return type. It lacks details about pagination behavior beyond start_at and limit but is sufficient for a simple retrieval tool.

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 description coverage is 100%, so the baseline is 3. The description adds value by explaining that setting 'state' to None returns all sprints, and it lists the parameter descriptions clearly. However, it does not significantly augment the schema's own descriptions.

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 verb 'Get' and the resource 'jira sprints from board'. It distinguishes itself from sibling tools like jira_get_agile_boards and jira_get_board_issues by focusing specifically on sprints. The parameter details further clarify the purpose.

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 retrieving sprints from a board but does not explicitly state when to use this tool versus alternatives (e.g., jira_get_sprint_issues for issues within a sprint). No exclusion criteria are provided.

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