jira_list_sprints

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the behavioral disclosure burden. It adds context about the Agile API and the state filter, but it does not mention pagination, response format, or permission requirements. For a simple read-only list operation, this is acceptable but not highly transparent.

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 concise sentences with the action verb front-loaded. Every word adds value, no redundancy. The structure is clean and easily scannable.

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 a simple listing operation with a well-defined schema and no output schema. The description covers the core functionality and a key use case. It lacks details on pagination or response shape, but given the simplicity, it is sufficiently complete for an agent to invoke correctly.

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%, so the schema already documents both parameters. The description adds a small usage hint for the 'state' parameter (to find the active sprint) but does not go beyond the schema's field descriptions. Base 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 uses a specific verb ('List') and identifies the exact resource ('sprints for a Jira Software board'), also noting the Agile API. It clearly distinguishes this from sibling tools like jira_search or jira_get_issue by focusing on sprint listing.

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 explains that filtering by state helps find the active sprint, giving a practical usage hint. It does not explicitly exclude alternatives, but the verb+resource combination makes the intended use obvious. Lacks explicit when-not-to-use guidance, so not a 5.

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