Sprints

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

Annotations indicate non-read-only, non-destructive, open-world. The description adds valuable context that sprint deletion is intentionally not exposed because it detaches all stories/tasks, a board-wide edit better done in the UI. This goes beyond annotations by explaining the design rationale, though it does not detail auth or rate limits.

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 a brief overview and bullet-pointed operations. Every line provides necessary information without redundancy or fluff.

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 covers all operations, required parameters, exclusions (deletion), and points to the correct sibling tool for related actions. It is sufficiently complete for an agent to select and invoke the 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 covers 100% of parameters with descriptions. The description adds operational context (e.g., which parameters are required for which op, project needed when sprint is a name) beyond the schema, improving the agent's ability to invoke the tool correctly.

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 it manages Taiga sprints with specific operations (list, get, create, stats). It distinguishes from siblings by explicitly mentioning the work tool for deletion and implying project tool for project-level tasks.

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?

Provides explicit operation-specific prerequisites (e.g., 'Requires project' for list, 'project required if sprint is a name' for get/stats). Also gives an alternative: 'Delete individual work items with the work tool instead' when discussing deletion.

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