info

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries the full burden of disclosing side effects, read-only nature, return values, or permissions. It mentions none of these, leaving the agent without critical behavioral context. This is a significant transparency gap.

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 one-sentence description is short but under-specified, offering no concrete information about the tool's functionality. It is not a concise summary of a fuller description but rather an inadequate placeholder, similar to the 'Process' example.

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 tool has 3 undocumented parameters, no annotations, and no output schema. The description does not explain what the tool returns, how parameters affect behavior, or how it relates to the sprint lifecycle. This is completely inadequate for an agent to invoke 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 0%, and the description does not mention any of the three parameters (git_dir, data_dir, workspace_dirs). The description adds no meaning beyond the raw parameter names, so the agent cannot infer their roles or formats.

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 uses abstract phrases like 'startup orientation' and 'compact sprint discovery' without a clear verb or resource. It does not specify whether the tool lists, gets, or displays information, and it fails to distinguish itself from similar sibling tools like 'overview' or 'dashboard_info'.

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?

No explicit guidance is given on when to use this tool versus alternatives. The phrase 'before binding to one sprint' implies a timing cue but does not clearly state scenarios or exclusions, and no alternative tools are mentioned.

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