list_epicsList all epics in your Shortcut workspace to view project initiatives and track their status.
List epics in your Shortcut workspace.
This tool declares no required parameters. Add optional parameters from the input schema as needed.
{
"id": 1,
"jsonrpc": "2.0",
"method": "tools/call",
"params": {
"arguments": {},
"name": "list_epics"
}
}| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| dry_run | No |
Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.
v1.0.0Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
With no annotations, the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure. It only restates the listing operation and does not explain the dry_run parameter's effect, pagination, return format, or other behavioral traits.
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, front-loaded sentence with no wasted words. It is appropriately concise for a simple listing tool, though it sacrifices useful detail.
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?
The tool is low-complexity but still includes an unexplained dry_run parameter and no output schema. The description omits any mention of this parameter and any usage context relative to sibling tools, making it insufficient for correct invocation.
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?
The sole parameter dry_run has zero schema description coverage, and the description does not mention it at all. The agent cannot determine what dry_run does or how it affects the listing, making this a critical gap.
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 a specific verb ('List') and resource ('epics') in the Shortcut workspace, making its core operation unambiguous. It does not explicitly distinguish from sibling tools like search_epics or get_epic, but the listing scope is clear enough.
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 is given on when to use list_epics versus search_epics, get_epic, or list_epic_stories. The description only states what the tool does, leaving the agent to infer selection from the name alone.
Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.