list_milestones

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden. It discloses the returned fields and scoping but does not mention authentication needs, error behaviors, rate limits, or side effects. For a read-only list operation, this is adequate but could be improved by noting typical response behavior.

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 four sentences, each serving a distinct purpose: stating the function, listing returned fields, connecting to sibling tools, and noting scoping constraints. No redundant or vague language.

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 return values, prerequisite steps (list_pipelines), and integration points (create_opportunity, update_opportunity). It lacks explicit mention of pagination behavior or default sorting, and does not address potential errors, but is otherwise comprehensive for a simple list tool.

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?

With 0% schema description coverage, the description must compensate. It adds meaning for pipelineId by explaining its role and requirement, but does not clarify the page/perPage parameters (e.g., defaults, ordering). The description adds value for the critical parameter but leaves others uncovered.

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 milestones (deal stages) for a specific pipeline, returns id/name/probability/position, and distinguishes itself by emphasizing pipeline scoping and its role in opportunity creation/update flows, which differentiates it from sibling tools like list_pipelines or list_stages.

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 explicitly instructs when to use the tool: before creating or updating opportunities, and to first call list_pipelines to obtain a pipelineId. It also warns that milestones are pipeline-scoped and not interchangeable, providing clear guidance on when not to use this tool.

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