list_milestones

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries the transparency burden. It discloses a key behavioral trait: closed milestones are hidden unless include_closed=true, which tells the agent an important default behavior. It does not mention auth, rate limits, or error handling, but for a read-only list tool this is acceptable.

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 two concise sentences. The first states the primary purpose; the second adds a critical behavioral detail. Every word earns its place, with no redundancy or filler.

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 the tool's simplicity, the description sufficiently covers the core action and a key default behavior. It does not explain output format options or return fields, but the schema documents the format parameter, and no output schema exists to be supplemented. The description is complete enough for a listing 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 description coverage is only 33%, so the description must compensate for undocumented parameters. It adds meaning to include_closed by explaining its effect on visibility. project_id is self-evident from the description, and format is already described in the schema. This partial compensation is adequate but not complete.

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 'a project's milestones', with clarifying 'release/epic groupings' to define what milestones are. This distinguishes it from sibling list tools such as list_stages, list_tags, and list_boards, which target different resources.

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 implies the tool is used to list a project's milestones but does not explicitly state when to use it over alternatives like get_milestone_metrics for metrics or list_work_items for work items. It provides a parameter-related guideline (include_closed) but lacks clear use-case boundaries.

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