get_milestone_stats

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

No annotations provided, so description carries full burden. It indicates the tool returns statistics but does not specify format, side effects (likely read-only), or any behavioral traits beyond what is implied. Basic transparency with no contradictions.

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 that is front-loaded with the tool's purpose and key data points. No unnecessary words; every part earns its place.

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?

For a simple statistics tool with one parameter and no output schema, the description covers the main purpose and data returned. However, it could mention the output format or any constraints on the milestone state. Still, it is largely complete given the tool's 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 one parameter (milestone_id) already described as 'Milestone/sprint numeric ID' in the schema. The description repeats this exactly, adding no additional meaning. Baseline score of 3 applies as schema does the heavy lifting.

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?

Description clearly states the tool returns progress statistics for a sprint/milestone, listing specific data like points done, remaining, and burndown data. This distinguishes it from sibling tools like get_milestone (basic info) and list_milestones (list all).

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 explicit guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives. The name and description imply it's for statistics, but there is no mention of when not to use it (e.g., for milestone details use get_milestone). Adequate but lacks explicit differentiation.

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