Get sprint view

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

With no annotations, the description is the sole behavioral source. It discloses the return composition and the significant behavioral fork in paging: Software API cursor paging on Cloud vs Agile 1.0 offset paging on Data Center. It does not spell out auth or side effects, but 'view' plus the read-oriented name makes the non-destructive nature reasonably clear.

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?

Two sentences, no filler: the first establishes the tool's purpose, the second flags the environment-specific paging behavior an agent must know before calling.

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?

Without an output schema, the description still tells the agent what will be returned (board, sprint, issues) and how issue pagination varies. It leaves exact response shape and permissions implicit, but provides enough for a sensible first call using the two required IDs.

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 high (83%), so the schema already documents most parameters. The paging sentence adds context for startAt and nextPageToken but mostly restates their schema meaning rather than adding new semantic detail.

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 operation and result: board details, sprint, and issues returned together in the style of the Jira UI. This clearly distinguishes it from narrower sibling tools like get_sprint_issues or get_sprint, which return only part of that picture.

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?

'In one call' establishes when to choose this tool: when a complete sprint-level board/issues view is wanted rather than a single-resource query. The Cloud vs Data Center paging caveat also tells the agent which parameters to use per environment, though it does not explicitly name alternatives or exclusions.

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