get_sprint_details

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

No annotations provided, so description carries full burden. States it returns comprehensive details but does not disclose what happens on invalid sprintId, permissions needed, or whether issues are basic or full objects. For a read-only get, basic transparency is acceptable.

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?

Single sentence, front-loaded with the tool's action and resource, no wasted words.

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?

For a simple get operation with one parameter and no output schema, the description covers the return contents and purpose. Lacks specification of how issues are returned (IDs or full objects), but overall sufficient.

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% with a clear description for sprintId. The tool description adds context about what the sprint details include but does not add new semantics for the parameter itself. Baseline 3 applies.

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?

Clearly states 'Get comprehensive details about a specific sprint' and lists included fields (name, dates, goals, issues). Distinguishes from siblings like 'get_my_current_sprint_issues' and 'list_sprints_for_board' by focusing on a single sprint with full details.

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?

Implies usage when a specific sprint ID is known, but does not explicitly mention when to use this over alternatives (e.g., when you need the full details vs a list). No usage exclusions or prerequisites provided.

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