item_deprecate
Deprecate an item in the sprint ledger by submitting a reason, preserving an immutable audit trail.
Instructions
Resolve an item as deprecated with a reason.
Input Schema
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| id | Yes | ||
| reason | Yes |
Deprecate an item in the sprint ledger by submitting a reason, preserving an immutable audit trail.
Resolve an item as deprecated with a reason.
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| id | Yes | ||
| reason | Yes |
Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
No annotations provided. Description only says 'resolve as deprecated' without disclosing side effects (e.g., visibility changes, artifact impacts). Full burden falls on description, which is insufficient.
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 with no wasted words, but under-specification reduces effectiveness.
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?
As a mutation tool with no annotations or output schema, the description should cover return behavior or state changes, which it does not.
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 0%. Description mentions 'reason' but adds no details on format, constraints, or purpose beyond the schema's required field.
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 tool resolves an item as deprecated, distinguishing it from siblings like item_done (resolve as done) or item_split.
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 guidance on when to use deprecation versus other resolution tools (e.g., item_done). Lacks context for prerequisites or alternatives.
Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.
We provide all the information about MCP servers via our MCP API.
curl -X GET 'https://glama.ai/api/mcp/v1/servers/ebursztein/sprinty'
If you have feedback or need assistance with the MCP directory API, please join our Discord server