jira_sprint_issues

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries full burden. It does not disclose read-only behavior, authentication needs, rate limits, or pagination behavior beyond the limit parameter. The minimal description fails to inform the agent of important operational 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 concise, consisting of two sentences that front-load the core purpose. No extraneous information, efficiently communicates the essential details.

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 3 parameters, no output schema, and no annotations, the description is moderately complete. It states return format (YAML) but misses guidance on getting sprint_id from sibling tools, authentication prerequisites, and pagination details beyond the limit parameter.

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% and already provides clear parameter descriptions. The tool description only repeats that it accepts an optional JQL filter, adding no extra meaning beyond the schema. Baseline score of 3 is appropriate.

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 the tool lists issues in a JIRA sprint, accepts an optional JQL filter, and returns YAML. It explicitly mirrors a specific CLI command, making the purpose unambiguous and distinguishing it from other listing tools.

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 provides no guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives like jira_search or jira_board_issues. It does not mention prerequisites (e.g., needing a sprint from jira_sprint_list) or when JQL filtering is appropriate.

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