taiga_userstories_list

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 mentions 'optional filters' but does not disclose pagination, default limits, response structure, or any side effects, leaving significant behavioral traits unspecified.

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 sentence, front-loaded with the verb, and contains no filler. It is concise and for what it states, it is efficient, though it may be too sparse for full usefulness.

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?

With 16 parameters, no annotations, and no output schema, the description is grossly inadequate. It provides no context on how the listing behaves, what fields are returned, how filters combine, or any other essential information for correct 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 description coverage is 63%, so the schema carries most of the parameter meaning. The description adds no specific parameter semantics; 'optional filters' is generic and does not help with the undocumented parameters such as exclude_role, exclude_tags, or status__is_closed.

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 tool lists user stories, using a specific verb and resource. It does not explicitly differentiate from sibling list tools for other entities, but the resource name in the tool name itself makes the purpose unambiguous.

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 on when to use this tool versus alternatives such as taiga_userstories_get or taiga_userstories_get_by_ref. The description only states what it does, not when to choose it or when to prefer alternatives.

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