sprint_detach

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

The description discloses that the tool stops the dashboard, implying a state change, but it does not mention reversibility, side effects, or required permissions. With no annotations, this is modestly transparent.

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, clear sentence of 13 words. It is appropriately concise for a zero-parameter tool, though it could add a bit more context.

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 zero-parameter schema and no annotations, the description adequately states the core function, but it lacks context on whether the action is reversible or what happens to related data.

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 tool has no parameters (schema coverage 100% via empty schema), so the description does not need to add parameter meaning. Baseline score of 3 is appropriate.

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 uses the verb 'detach' and specifies the resource ('Sprinty binding' and 'dashboard'), distinguishing it from sibling tools like sprint_close or sprint_archive. However, 'this MCP session' is slightly ambiguous without context.

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 provides no guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives like sprint_close or sprint_archive. The agent is left to infer usage from the name and context.

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