getAvailableEnumOptionsForWorkItemType

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

Annotations are absent, so the description bears full responsibility. It only says 'returns a list' without disclosing side effects, permissions, or pagination behavior, despite having pagination parameters. This is insufficient for a read operation that may have constraints.

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 clear sentence with no wasted words, front-loading the purpose. However, it could be slightly improved by adding structured details on pagination or parameters.

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 lack of annotations and output schema, the description is incomplete. It does not explain return value format, pagination handling, or differentiate from similar tools. For a 5-parameter tool with pagination, more context is needed.

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%, but schema descriptions are minimal (e.g., 'The Field ID.'). The description adds no further meaning; it does not clarify the 'type' parameter or how parameters interact. Baseline of 3 is not justified as the description fails to provide additional context.

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 returns a list of available options for a field for a specific Work Item Type, using specific verbs and resource. However, it does not distinguish from siblings like getAvailableEnumOptionsForWorkItem or getAvailableEnumOptionsForDocument, which are likely similar but for different contexts.

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?

No guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives, such as the sibling tools for documents or work items. The description does not provide context, prerequisites, or exclusions.

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