jira_sprint_list

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

The description discloses the optional state filter and the YAML return format. It references a CLI command, which provides provenance. However, it does not mention pagination behavior (limit parameter) or error handling, and there are no annotations to supplement. Still, most key behaviors are covered.

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 sentences efficiently convey the core purpose, optional filter, return format, and CLI equivalent. No wasted words, and the most critical information 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?

The description covers the main actions and key parameter, but lacks details about return YAML structure or pagination. Since there is no output schema, the description could explain the response format more fully. However, for a list operation with moderate complexity, it is nearly complete.

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?

All three parameters have schema descriptions (100% coverage). The description adds explicit mention of state filter values but does not elaborate beyond the schema for limit or board_id. Given high schema coverage, the description provides marginal added value, meeting the baseline.

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 sprints on an agile board, with an optional state filter. It distinguishes from sibling tools like jira_sprint_issues and jira_sprint_create by focusing on listing sprints. The mention of return format (YAML) adds specificity.

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 listing sprints is needed, but does not explicitly state when to use this tool versus alternatives (e.g., jira_sprint_issues for sprint contents). No prerequisites or exclusions are mentioned, leaving the agent to infer context from the sibling list.

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