ado_query_sprint

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

Without annotations, the description carries the full burden. It states the tool queries user stories, implying a read operation, but does not explicitly confirm read-only behavior, side effects, or permissions needed. The behavioral revelation is minimal but not misleading.

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 a single sentence that efficiently captures the core purpose. It is front-loaded with the action and resource. However, it could be more structured or include additional context without sacrificing conciseness.

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 no output schema and no annotations, the description covers the basic purpose but lacks details on return format, pagination, or error handling. For a simple query tool, it is adequate but not complete compared to high-quality examples.

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 coverage is 100% with both parameters described in Spanish. The tool description adds no new meaning beyond the schema; it merely restates the sprint context. Baseline 3 is appropriate as the schema already documents the parameters adequately.

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 it queries user stories for a specific sprint using a direct verb (Consulta) and resource (User Stories, sprint). It differentiates from sibling tools like ado_query_area and ado_query_wiql by focusing on sprint and user stories.

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 for querying user stories by sprint but provides no explicit guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives like ado_query_wiql for complex queries or ado_query_area for area-based filtering. No when-not or alternative names are mentioned.

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