backlog_wakeup

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

No annotations are provided, so the description must carry the full burden. It explains what data the tool returns (active tasks, epics, completions, activity) and mentions optional scope. However, it does not disclose any behavioral traits such as side effects, authentication needs, or behavior on invalid inputs.

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 two sentences, front-loaded with the core purpose, and every word adds value. There is no redundancy or irrelevant information.

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 tool's complexity and no output schema, the description explains the briefing content but lacks specifics on the return format or structure. It is adequate for a briefing tool but could be more complete by hinting at the output shape.

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?

Input schema has 100% description coverage, so the schema already documents all parameters. The description adds value by providing usage examples and context, such as 'Use a folder ID for project-scoped wake-up', enriching the schema's descriptions.

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 it is a dense session-start briefing with specific content: active tasks, current epics, recent completions with evidence snippets, and recent activity. It distinguishes from sibling CRUD and search tools by being a summary tool for session initialization.

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 explicitly advises using it 'at the start of every session' and mentions optional scoping with a folder, milestone, or epic. It provides clear context for when to use but does not explicitly exclude alternatives or mention when not to use.

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