sprint_close

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

The description mentions a 'programmatic re-check of all gates' as a precondition, hinting at some validation behavior, but it does not explain what happens if the re-check fails, nor does it disclose other side effects or requirements. With no annotations, the burden is higher.

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 concise sentence that front-loads the main action, but it could be slightly more structured without losing efficiency.

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 lack of annotations, no output schema, and a complex parameter with no explanation, the description is far too brief to provide adequate context for an AI agent 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?

The input schema has one complex parameter 'coverage' with zero description coverage, and the tool description does not mention or explain this parameter at all, leaving its purpose and usage completely unclear.

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 action 'Close the sprint' and adds a specific precondition 'after a programmatic re-check of all gates,' distinguishing it from sibling tools like sprint_archive and sprint_detach.

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 implies that the tool should be used only after a programmatic re-check of gates, but it does not explicitly state when not to use it or provide alternatives among sibling tools.

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