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 does not state whether this is a read operation, how pagination behaves, or what the response format is for a list operation with page and per_page parameters.

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?

Single compact sentence, front-loaded with the verb and resource. No wasted words, though it is arguably too terse given the parameter count.

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 six-parameter paginated list tool with no annotations and no output schema, the description is insufficient. It omits pagination defaults, search behavior, the ancestor-groups implication, and any return-shape expectations.

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 67%, so the schema documents state, project_id, and include_ancestor_groups, but page, per_page, and search have no descriptions. The description adds the state options and the start/due date return concept but does not compensate for the undocumented pagination and search parameters.

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?

Clear verb (List) and resource (project milestones), with scope modifiers (active, closed, all) and returned fields (start and due dates). It is distinguishable from sibling get_milestone and create/update_milestone, though it does not explicitly name siblings.

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?

No explicit when-to-use or when-not-to-use guidance. The agent must infer that this is the read equivalent of get_milestone, and no prerequisites or alternatives are mentioned.

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