Get GitHub Milestone Details

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint, idempotentHint, non-destructive, and openWorld, so the safety profile is fully covered. The description adds that the response includes progress and linked issue counts, which is mild value, but with an output schema present this is largely redundant and nothing is said about rate limits or auth.

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?

A single front-loaded sentence that identifies the resource, the lookup key, and the notable return content. No 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?

With an output schema and rich annotations, the description needs only to convey intent and it does. The minor shortfall is not alluding to the repo/owner auto-detection behavior or differentiating from the list-milestones sibling.

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 75%, with repo/owner already carrying 'LEAVE EMPTY to auto-detect from git' and milestone_number self-explanatory. The description adds no parameter meaning and leaves use_test_db undocumented, so it neither compensates for the gap nor adds value.

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?

States a specific verb and resource: get details for a specific GitHub milestone, with the added scope of progress and linked issue counts. This distinguishes it reasonably from get_github_milestones (plural/list) and the create/update/delete milestone siblings, though the description never explicitly contrasts them.

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?

Usage is only implied by 'a specific GitHub milestone' – the agent can infer it should use get_github_milestones for listing. No explicit when-to-use, when-not, or named alternative is given, leaving routing to the plural sibling to inference.

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