get_overdue_milestones

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries full burden for behavioral disclosure. 'Get a list' implies a read operation, but it doesn't specify permissions needed, pagination behavior, rate limits, or what 'overdue' means (e.g., based on due dates vs. completion status). The description is too minimal for a tool that likely queries time-sensitive data.

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 extremely concise at just one sentence with no wasted words. It's front-loaded with the core purpose, though this brevity comes at the cost of completeness. Every word earns its place in conveying the basic function.

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 tool with 2 required parameters, 0% schema coverage, no annotations, and no output schema, the description is inadequate. It doesn't explain what constitutes 'overdue', how results are returned, or provide any context about the parameters. The minimal description leaves too many gaps for effective tool use.

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?

With 0% schema description coverage for both parameters (limit and includeIssues), the description adds no semantic information about what these parameters do. It doesn't explain what 'limit' controls (e.g., max results) or what 'includeIssues' means (e.g., whether to fetch associated issues). The description fails to compensate for the schema's lack of documentation.

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 'Get a list of overdue milestones' clearly states the verb ('Get') and resource ('overdue milestones'), making the purpose understandable. However, it doesn't distinguish this tool from sibling tools like 'get_milestone_metrics' or 'get_upcoming_milestones', leaving the scope differentiation unclear.

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 no guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives. With sibling tools like 'get_milestone_metrics' and 'get_upcoming_milestones' available, there's no indication of what makes 'overdue' milestones distinct or when this specific query is appropriate.

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