list_stories

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full behavioral burden. It never states whether the result is paginated, whether status filtering is optional, whether an empty list is returned for an epic with no stories, or what ordering to expect. 'List' implies a read, but nothing concrete is disclosed.

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?

A single short sentence with no filler, and the key scoping constraint (epic) is front-loaded. It is efficient, though the extreme brevity is part of why other dimensions are thin.

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?

For a simple filtered list with a fully documented two-parameter schema and no output schema, the description covers the essentials. It falls short of complete because it omits pagination behavior and any mention of the status filter that the schema exposes.

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 both epic_id (UUID, required) and the status enum are already fully documented in the schema. The description only echoes the epic scoping and says nothing about the status filter, so baseline 3 applies.

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?

States a specific verb (list) and resource (stories) scoped to a parent epic, so the agent knows exactly what it retrieves. It does not, however, distinguish itself from nearby siblings such as list_issues or get_story, so the purpose is clear but not sibling-differentiated.

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 phrase 'for a specific epic' implies the call context, but there is no explicit when-to-use guidance, no statement of when not to use it, and no mention of alternatives like list_issues or search_issues. The agent must infer the routing decision entirely on its own.

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