linear_get_project_milestones

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries full burden. It mentions filtering and pagination but does not disclose behavioral traits such as authentication requirements, rate limits, error handling, or the effect of invalid input (e.g., unknown projectId). The minimal description leaves critical gaps for the agent.

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, front-loaded sentence that efficiently conveys the core purpose ('get milestones for a project') and key features ('filtering and pagination'). No wasted words; concise and clear.

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?

Despite many parameters (8), nested filters, and no output schema or annotations, the description remains minimal. It does not explain return format, pagination behavior, ordering options, or how to use the filter parameter effectively. The agent would need more context to use the tool correctly.

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%, with all parameters having descriptions. The tool description adds no extra meaning beyond the schema; it restates the purpose briefly. Baseline of 3 is appropriate as the schema does the heavy lifting, but the description does not enhance understanding.

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 'milestones for a project', and mentions filtering and pagination. It effectively distinguishes this tool from sibling tools like linear_create_project_milestone or linear_update_project_milestone.

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 lacks any guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives. It does not specify when not to use it, nor does it differentiate from other listing/searching tools like linear_search_issues or linear_list_projects. The agent receives no context about selection criteria.

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