Pb Milestones

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

Annotations already establish that this is a read-only, idempotent, open-world, non-destructive operation. The description adds a useful safety signal that Jira text is data rather than instructions, but it does not otherwise deepen behavioral context such as pagination or data freshness.

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 compact and front-loads the milestone metrics, with the security note kept separate. It uses little space, though its brevity contributes to gaps in selection guidance and parameter meaning.

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 the crowded sibling set, an agent needs clearer when-to-use guidance than this provides, especially versus pb_forecast. Output schema and annotations help with return format and safety, but the description still leaves key selection and parameter context incomplete.

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 only 50%, and the description does not explain either plan_id or cursor. The cursor schema note 'From next_cursor.' is minimal, and plan_id is left entirely unexplained in both description and schema.

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 names a specific resource, milestones, and the key metrics returned: forecast vs. target and slip in working days. It lacks an explicit verb and does not differentiate itself from nearby tools such as pb_forecast or pb_critical_path, but the resource+data scope is understandable.

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?

There is no guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives like pb_forecast, pb_critical_path, or pb_plan_summary. The only secondary sentence is a security note, not usage guidance.

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