sprints_list_active

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

No annotations provided, so the description must carry the full burden. It mentions pagination but lacks details on default page size, ordering, rate limits, or whether authentication is required. 'Active' is defined by the system but not explained.

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?

Extremely concise: one sentence that fully communicates the core purpose. No redundant words, and the key information (paginated, active, project-scoped) is front-loaded.

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 no output schema and no descriptions for 4 parameters, the description is too sparse. It does not explain what fields are returned, how pagination works, or if projectId is required. The tool has moderate complexity, and the description fails to provide a complete picture.

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%, yet the description adds no explanation of any parameter (page, pageSize, filters, projectId). It does not clarify what 'filters' accepts or that projectId is likely required, leaving the agent without guidance beyond parameter names.

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?

Clearly states the tool returns a 'paginated list of active sprints for a project.' The verb 'Get' and resource 'active sprints' are specific, and the scope 'for a project' distinguishes from generic sprint list tools like sprints_list.

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?

No explicit guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives (e.g., sprints_list, sprints_list_for_filter). Usage is implied by the name and description: retrieve only active sprints for a project, but no exclusions or conditions are mentioned.

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