jira_update_sprint

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

With no annotations, the description must disclose behavioral traits. It mentions updateable fields but omits side effects (e.g., state changes may affect issue assignments), required permissions, or whether updates are idempotent. The description leaves significant gaps for an agent to safely use the tool.

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?

Single sentence with parenthetical list of fields. No redundant information. Front-loaded with verb and resource. Maximally concise.

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?

The tool has 6 parameters with full schema descriptions, but the description does not cover return value or error conditions. Given no output schema, this is a minor gap. Adequate for a simple update, but not fully complete.

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 100%, and the description lists all updatable fields in parentheses, reinforcing the schema. However, it does not add new meaning beyond the schema's own descriptions (e.g., state enum values). 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 clearly states the verb 'Update' and the resource 'existing sprint', listing the fields that can be updated (name, dates, state, goal). This distinguishes it from create or get tools among siblings, though it could be more explicit about not creating sprints.

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 vs alternatives. It does not mention prerequisites like needing the sprint ID from jira_get_sprints, nor does it explain when to use update vs transition or other operations.

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