nexus_list_milestones

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries full burden for behavioral disclosure. It mentions filtering capabilities but doesn't describe important behaviors like pagination, sorting, default ordering, error conditions, or what happens when no filters are applied. For a listing tool, details about result format, limits, or whether it returns all fields are missing, leaving significant gaps in understanding how the tool behaves.

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, efficient sentence that communicates the core purpose without unnecessary words. It's appropriately sized for a straightforward listing tool and front-loads the essential information. Every word earns its place with no redundancy or fluff.

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 moderate complexity (4 optional parameters, no output schema, no annotations), the description is insufficiently complete. It doesn't address what the tool returns, how results are structured, whether there are limitations on result sets, or how it integrates with the broader system. For a listing operation that might return substantial data, more context about output behavior would be helpful.

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 100%, so the schema already documents all four parameters thoroughly. The description adds minimal value by mentioning 'date range and type filtering' which corresponds to startDate, endDate, and type parameters, but doesn't provide additional context beyond what's in the schema. The baseline score of 3 reflects adequate but not enhanced parameter documentation.

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 the action ('List milestones') and mentions optional filtering capabilities ('with optional date range and type filtering'). It distinguishes this as a listing operation rather than creation or update, which helps differentiate from siblings like 'nexus_create_milestone' and 'nexus_update_milestone'. However, it doesn't explicitly contrast with other listing tools like 'nexus_list_bugs' or 'nexus_list_projects' beyond the resource type.

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 provides no guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives. It doesn't mention prerequisites, when filtering is appropriate, or how this differs from other listing tools on the server. For example, it doesn't clarify if this is the primary way to retrieve milestones or if there are other methods like searching through projects.

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