list_sprints

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

With no annotations, the description fully carries the behavioral burden. It discloses the module requirement, the limit cap, the meaning of total (page count only), and early termination behavior—all beyond what a simple 'list' implies.

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 concise but information-dense. Each sentence adds value: purpose, prerequisite, pagination details, and total semantics. It is well-organized and front-loaded with the core action.

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 no output schema, the description adequately covers return values (total, next_offset) and pagination. It covers key usage context and edge cases (module requirement, page stopping), making it complete for a list-with-pagination tool.

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 0%, so the description must compensate. It explains limit's cap and default, and offset's role in pagination via next_offset, giving meaningful semantics for both parameters.

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 'List' and resource 'Backlogs sprints' with scope 'visible to the current token.' It distinguishes from siblings like get_sprint and list_project_sprints by indicating a global, token-scoped listing.

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 provides a prerequisite (OpenProject Backlogs module) and explains pagination behavior. However, it does not explicitly name alternative tools like list_project_sprints, so the agent must infer when this global listing is preferred over a project-specific one.

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