monday-dev: Get Sprints Metadata

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true and destructiveHint=false. The description adds the output data fields but does not disclose additional behavioral traits such as permissions, error handling, or rate limits. It provides adequate but not rich behavioral context beyond annotations.

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 well-structured with clear sections and front-loaded information. It is concise but includes a list of output fields that could be partially inferred from the schema, though still helpful. No waste, but slightly verbose.

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?

Despite no output schema, the description lists the data retrieved, making the return values clear. It mentions the required board ID and limit parameter. However, it does not address pagination or multiple boards, but given the sibling for board IDs, it is sufficiently complete for a metadata retrieval 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 100%, and the schema descriptions already cover both parameters. The description repeats the limit default and max but adds no new meaning beyond what the schema provides. Baseline 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 uses a specific verb ('Get') and resource ('comprehensive sprint metadata from a monday-dev sprints board'), clearly distinguishing it from siblings like get_monday_dev_sprints_boards (which returns board IDs) and get_sprint_summary (which returns summary of a single sprint).

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 states that the tool requires the 'Main Sprints board ID' but does not explicitly guide when to use this tool versus alternatives. It implies usage context but lacks explicit when-not or alternative tool references, which are available among siblings.

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