list_milestones

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure. It correctly communicates the read-only nature of listing and the valid state filter values, but it omits any mention of response format, pagination, or ordering behavior, which are relevant for a list operation.

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?

A single, well-structured sentence that front-loads the core action and immediately specifies the accepted state values. No filler or redundant wording.

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 provides the essential purpose and state options, but for a tool with no output schema and no annotations, it is thin on return value details and pagination behavior. It is adequate for a simple list operation but leaves some operational context unstated.

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 0%, so the description must compensate. It does cover the 'state' parameter by listing its three possible values, but owner and repo are left to inference from their names. This is partial compensation for the schema gap.

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 states a clear verb ('List') and resource ('milestones in a repository'), and the explicit state values ('open', 'closed', or 'all') further define the scope. It is distinguishable from sibling list_repositories, which targets a different resource (repositories vs. milestones).

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?

Usage context is implied by the name and description: if an agent needs milestones for a repository, this is the tool. However, there is no explicit guidance on when not to use it or how it compares to alternatives, though no direct sibling for milestones exists among the provided tools.

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