linear_project_milestones_list

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true, idempotentHint=true, and openWorldHint=true, so safety/idempotency are covered. The description adds the project-scoping hint but says nothing about pagination behavior, default page size, or archived handling, which are behavioral traits an agent would want.

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?

Two short sentences, front-loaded with the core action and immediately followed by the key scoping note. No wasted words.

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?

For a read-only list tool with a fully documented schema and readOnly/idempotent annotations, the description covers the essential purpose. The only gap is the absence of any pagination or default-return note, which is minor given the schema's explicit pageInfo/after documentation.

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 100%, with clear descriptions for first/after/filter/includeArchived, so the schema does the heavy lifting. The description only echoes the filter-by-project idea, adding no syntax or format detail beyond the schema.

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 (List) and resource (project milestones), which cleanly separates it from siblings like linear_project_milestone_create or linear_projects_list. It does not name a sibling explicitly, so it falls short of the top mark.

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?

"Filter by project to get one project's" implies the main usage context (scoping to a single project), but there is no explicit when-to-use vs alternatives, no mention of pagination, and no guidance on the unfiltered case returning all milestones across projects.

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