taiga_userstories_watchers

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

No annotations are provided, so the description must carry the behavioral burden. It simply states 'List watchers of a user story' without disclosing return format, pagination, permissions, or read-only status. While 'List' implies a read operation, the description adds no behavioral context beyond the tool's name.

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 with no redundant words. It front-loads the verb and resource clearly and is appropriately sized for the tool's simplicity.

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 a single parameter, no output schema, and no annotations, the description is minimal but functional for identifying the tool's purpose. However, it lacks any detail about return value shape, authentication, or related operations, which an agent might need for correct invocation. It is adequate but not rich.

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?

The input schema already documents the single parameter 'id' as 'User Story ID' with 100% coverage. The description confirms that it lists watchers for a specific user story but does not add syntax, format, or usage details beyond the schema. Meets the baseline for high schema coverage.

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's function: 'List watchers of a user story.' It uses a specific verb ('List') and a specific resource ('watchers of a user story'), which distinguishes it from sibling tools that list watchers for other entities (epics, tasks, issues) and from voter/upvote tools. The scope is unambiguous despite being concise.

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 about when to use this tool vs. alternatives. There is no mention of related tools like taiga_userstories_watch/unwatch or taiga_userstories_voters, nor any prerequisites or scenarios. The description only states what it does, not when to use it.

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