Get Sprint

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

No annotations are provided, so the description must carry the full burden. The verb 'Get' implies a read-only operation, and 'including its issues' clarifies the return content. However, it does not disclose any error behavior or edge cases, and it does not explicitly state that it has no side effects.

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 sentence, only 11 words, and immediately states the action and target. There is no wasted verbiage.

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?

This is a simple single-parameter get tool with an output schema present, so the description need not explain return values. The description covers the core functionality adequately and is complete for its simplicity.

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 a single parameter 'sprintId' already described as 'Sprint ID to get'. The description adds no additional parameter meaning beyond reinforcing that the sprint must be specific, so the baseline 3 applies.

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 uses the specific verb 'Get' with the resource 'sprint' and adds the detail 'including its issues', making it clear what the tool does. It distinguishes itself from sibling tools like listSprints (which presumably lists sprints) and getIssue (which gets a single issue).

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 usage when you need details of one specific sprint via 'specific sprint', but it does not explicitly state when to use this tool over alternatives like listSprints. There is no mention of exclusions or alternative tools.

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