taiga_users_voted

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure. It only states that the tool lists items voted by a user; it does not disclose whether this is a read-only operation beyond the verb 'List', what item types are included, pagination behavior, authentication requirements, or error conditions.

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 concise sentence, front-loaded with the verb and resource, containing no wasted words. It earns its place, though it is minimal and could benefit from more detail without becoming verbose.

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?

Although the tool is simple with one parameter, the absence of an output schema and annotations means the description should clarify what 'items' refers to or what the caller can expect in the response. The description remains too vague to fully support confident invocation.

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% with the single parameter 'id' already described as 'User ID'. The description 'List items voted by a user' adds no additional meaning beyond what the schema provides, so the baseline score 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?

Description uses a specific verb 'List' and resource 'items voted by a user', making the primary purpose clear. It distinguishes from siblings like taiga_users_liked and taiga_users_watched by focusing on 'voted'. However, 'items' is vague and does not specify whether these are epics, user stories, tasks, or issues.

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 guidance is provided on when to use this tool versus alternatives. Sibling tools such as taiga_epics_voters, taiga_tasks_voters, and taiga_users_liked exist, but the description does not mention any context, exclusions, or alternative selection criteria. Usage is only implied by the name and one-line description.

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