milestone_stats

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden. It discloses what data is returned (total/completed points, user stories, tasks, per-day breakdown) but does not explicitly confirm a read-only operation, mention permissions, or describe error behavior. This is a moderate gap.

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 a single, focused sentence with no redundancy. The main verb 'Get' is front-loaded, and each detail (points, user stories, tasks, per-day) 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?

This is a simple read tool with one parameter and no output schema. The description adequately covers the response contents (stats breakdown), which is sufficient for an agent to select and invoke it correctly. Minor gaps like metric definitions are not critical for usage.

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?

The input schema fully describes the single 'id' parameter as 'Milestone id' (100% coverage). The description adds no additional parameter context, so the baseline score of 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 clearly states the tool's function: 'Get burndown/points stats for a milestone (sprint)'. It lists specific metrics (total and completed points, user stories, tasks, per-day breakdown), distinguishing it from sibling tools like milestone_get which would retrieve general milestone data.

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 makes the use case evident: use this tool when you need burndown or points statistics for a sprint. It does not explicitly name alternatives or exclusions, but the focused scope implies when it should be used, providing clear context.

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