List Epic Stories

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure. It only says 'List all stories', which implies a read operation and scope, but does not address dry_run behavior, pagination, ordering, or any API-side effects or prerequisites.

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 single-sentence description is concise, direct, and front-loaded with the key action and resource. No filler or redundant wording is present.

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 low complexity of the tool, the description is mostly adequate, but the unexplained dry_run flag and lack of return-format or pagination details create meaningful gaps. It is a minimum-viable description for an otherwise simple list operation.

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 0%, so the description must compensate. It clarifies that epic_id identifies a Shortcut epic, but it does not explain the dry_run parameter at all, leaving one of the two schema properties semantically incomplete.

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 uses a specific verb ('List') and a clear resource ('all stories belonging to a Shortcut epic'), which fully states the tool's function. This differentiates it from sibling tools like list_epics or list_epic_comments.

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 clearly indicates the use case: retrieving all stories for a given epic. It does not explicitly mention alternatives or exclusions, but the context is unambiguous enough for an agent to select it appropriately.

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