get_incomplete_tasks_by_milestone

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

Annotations already declare safe, idempotent read operation. The description adds that the tool returns incomplete tasks with related subtasks/sidequests, which is useful context beyond annotations. However, it does not clarify whether the subtasks/sidequests are embedded or returned separately, leaving some ambiguity.

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 that is front-loaded with the key action and resource. While it could include more detail, it avoids unnecessary verbosity.

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 absence of an output schema, the description partially explains what is returned ('open tasks with related subtasks/sidequests') but does not specify the response structure or format. For a simple getter with annotations, it is minimally complete but not thorough.

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 the parameter descriptions in the schema already cover both parameters. The description does not add additional meaning or syntax hints for the parameters; it only describes the overall output.

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 action ('Get'), the resource ('open tasks for a milestone'), and the inclusion of related entities ('with related subtasks/sidequests'). This distinguishes it from sibling tools like 'get_tasks_by_milestone' (likely all tasks) and 'get_incomplete_tasks' (without milestone filter).

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 explicit guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives such as 'get_tasks_by_milestone' or 'get_incomplete_tasks'. It lacks information about prerequisites or exclusions, leaving the agent to infer usage solely from the name and description.

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