Get Shortcut Milestone

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

No annotations are provided, placing the full burden on the description. However, the description only says 'Get' without disclosing error behavior (e.g., not found), side effects (none), authentication needs, or why the optional dry_run parameter exists. This minimal disclosure is insufficient for a tool operating without annotation support.

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, efficiently worded sentence without redundant information. It is appropriately sized for the tool's simplicity, though it misses opportunities to include parameter hints. No wasted words are present, and the key purpose is front-loaded.

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 has two parameters, no annotations, and no output schema, the description is incomplete. It fails to explain the dry_run parameter, which is a significant gap, and provides no context about error handling or return behavior. An agent would likely lack enough information to use this tool confidently in edge cases.

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?

With schema description coverage at 0%, the description must compensate for parameter documentation. It adds a redundant mention that milestone_id is numeric (already in schema as integer) but entirely omits the dry_run parameter. The description provides minimal added meaning beyond the structured schema, leaving dry_run's purpose unexplained.

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?

Description states 'Get a Shortcut milestone by numeric milestone ID' with a specific verb ('Get'), resource ('Shortcut milestone'), and identifier ('numeric milestone ID'). This clearly distinguishes it from sibling tools like list_milestones, create_milestone, and update_milestone, making its purpose unambiguous.

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 usage when a single milestone's numeric ID is known, but it does not explicitly state when to use this tool over alternatives (e.g., list_milestones for browsing all milestones). No exclusions or alternative tool references are provided, leaving usage guidance implied rather than explicit.

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