sprint_remove_tasks

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden. 'Detach' implies the tasks survive and only the sprint association is removed, but the description doesn't say whether task status/board position changes, whether the operation is reversible, or whether it fails on tasks not in the sprint.

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?

A single front-loaded sentence with zero waste, but for a batch mutation tool it is undersized rather than appropriately concise — the terseness comes at the cost of behavioral detail an agent needs.

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?

With no annotations, no output schema, and an unelaborated mutation, the description leaves the agent guessing about side effects (bulk partial failure, status changes, reversibility). For a 2-required-param write operation, substantially more context is warranted.

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 only 50%, and the description adds nothing about either parameter. It doesn't mention that multiple tasks can be detached in one call, whether unknown IDs cause partial failure, or what 'sprint' should be when the sprint is at capacity/closed.

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?

'Detach tasks from a sprint' states a specific verb (detach) and resource (tasks/sprint), and the antonym relationship with the sibling sprint_add_tasks makes the distinction obvious without naming it. It stops short of a 5 because it never explicitly routes against that sibling or clarifies the effect on the tasks themselves.

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?

There is no guidance on when to use this versus sprint_add_tasks, change_sprint_status, or edit_task, and no stated prerequisites (e.g., sprint must be active, task must currently be in the sprint). The agent must infer usage entirely from the name.

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