get_index_summary

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

Annotations already indicate destructiveHint=true and readOnlyHint=false, suggesting potential side effects, but the description adds useful context by specifying the return format (array with epic_id, title, status, counts, stories). However, it does not explain the destructive nature implied by annotations, leaving a gap in behavioral disclosure.

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 front-loaded with the core purpose, followed by usage context and return details in two efficient sentences, with no wasted words or unnecessary elaboration.

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 tool's complexity (aggregating data across epics and stories), lack of output schema, and annotations hinting at destructive behavior, the description is adequate but incomplete. It explains the return structure well but does not address the destructive implications or potential side effects, leaving gaps for the agent to infer.

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?

With 0 parameters and 100% schema description coverage, the baseline is high. The description appropriately does not discuss parameters, focusing instead on the tool's purpose and output, which adds value without redundancy.

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 specific action ('Get a high-level summary') and resource ('all epics and their story counts broken down by status'), distinguishing it from siblings like 'list_stories' or 'get_story' by focusing on aggregated summary data rather than individual items or lists.

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?

It provides clear context for when to use this tool ('Useful for situational awareness at the start of a session, without reading every file'), but does not explicitly mention when not to use it or name specific alternatives among the sibling tools, such as 'list_stories' for more detailed information.

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