taiga_resolver_milestone

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden. It states the action ('Resolve...to its ID') but does not disclose behavioral nuances such as whether this is a read-only operation, what happens if the slug is not found, or that the project parameter is required for disambiguation. The one-sentence description adds no context beyond the core purpose.

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 one short sentence with no redundant words. It delivers the essential information front-loaded and nothing more, which is ideal for a simple resolver tool.

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 low-complexity lookup tool with 100% parameter schema coverage, the description is largely complete: it states the purpose and output. It does not describe error behavior or explain the need for the project parameter beyond the schema, but this is a minor gap given the tool's simplicity and the schema's clarity.

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 100%: both 'project' and 'milestone' have descriptions ('Project slug' and 'Milestone slug'). The main description adds no additional meaning beyond the schema, and the parameter names are self-explanatory. Therefore the baseline of 3 is appropriate.

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 'Resolve a milestone slug to its ID' uses a specific verb ('Resolve') and names the exact resource (milestone) and outcome (ID). It clearly distinguishes itself from sibling resolver tools by explicitly mentioning milestone, and from milestone CRUD tools by stating its resolution purpose.

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 implies the usage scenario: when you have a milestone slug and need its ID. However, it does not explicitly state when to use this tool over alternatives like taiga_milestones_get or mention any exclusions/prerequisites. The guidance is implied rather than explicit.

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