sprint_list

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

No annotations are provided, so the description must convey behavioral traits. It describes two operational modes but does not disclose whether the operation is read-only, what error conditions exist (e.g., invalid data_dir), or any permission requirements. The description is sparse on behavioral details.

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 of 14 words. It conveys the essential functionality without any extraneous information, making it efficient and easy to parse.

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?

For a simple list tool with one optional parameter, the description covers the basic behavior but lacks details about the return value (e.g., format, structure) and error handling. Given no output schema or annotations, more context would be beneficial for complete understanding.

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 schema provides no description for the data_dir parameter (0% coverage). The tool description adds meaning by explaining that data_dir specifies a directory for listing, and when omitted it lists the current binding. This clarifies the parameter's role but does not detail format, default values, or edge cases.

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 'List' as a specific verb and identifies the resource as 'sprint ledgers'. It distinguishes two modes (with data_dir vs. current binding), differentiating it from sibling tools like sprint_new or sprint_close. However, the term 'current binding' may be slightly ambiguous.

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 when to use the data_dir parameter versus omitting it, but it does not provide explicit guidance on when to use this tool compared to alternatives like subsprint_list or other sprint tools. No warnings about prerequisites or conditions are given.

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