milestone_status

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries the full behavioral burden. 'Rollup' communicates a read-only aggregation action, and the listed output fields—counts, blockers, branch-only items, days to target—tell the agent what kind of information will be produced. It does not discuss errors or freshness, but for a status-report tool this is sufficient transparency.

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 compact and front-loaded: a one-sentence summary of purpose and content, followed by a clearly labeled Args section. Every sentence adds useful information with no filler or repetition of the tool name.

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 tool with one parameter and a provided output schema, the description is complete: it identifies the input format and describes the categories of data returned. It would not be reasonable to expect more detail for a simple milestone-status rollup.

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%, so the description must compensate. It does by explaining that 'id' is the 'Milestone slug', adding meaningful semantic content beyond the raw schema field name. This is a complete and precise parameter definition for the single required argument.

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 states a specific verb and resource: a 'Detailed rollup for one milestone' and enumerates the exact contents of the rollup (counts by status/size, blockers, branch-only items, days to target). This clearly distinguishes it from sibling tools like milestone_list and milestone_audit_query by emphasizing a single-milestone aggregate view.

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 phrase 'Detailed rollup for one milestone' gives a clear context for when to use this tool: when an agent needs a comprehensive status/summary of a specific milestone. It does not explicitly name alternative tools or exclusions, but the one-milestone scope is an unambiguous selection signal among the sibling tools.

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