list_user_stories

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the behavioral transparency burden. It adds value by explaining the id vs ref distinction, verbosity levels, and default session behavior. However, it does not disclose pagination, rate limiting, or authorization requirements.

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 three sentences, front-loaded with the main action, then details. It is reasonably concise, though the explanation of verbosity could be integrated more tightly.

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?

Despite having an output schema, the description explains key aspects like id/ref and verbosity. However, it omits details on the filters parameter and pagination, making it somewhat incomplete for a tool with multiple parameters.

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 compensates by explaining id/ref (which are not explicit in the schema), verbosity options, and session default. However, the 'filters' parameter remains completely unexplained, leaving a gap.

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 user stories within a specific project, with optional filtering. This distinguishes it from sibling list tools like list_epics or list_issues. However, it could be more specific about what filters are available, given the schema has a 'filters' property with no description.

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 mentions using default session if session_id not provided, but provides no guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives (e.g., search or other list tools). No context on when to choose different verbosity levels.

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