Milestones

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true, idempotentHint=true, and destructiveHint=false, covering safety. The description adds valuable context about including progress statistics (total/closed issue counts), which isn't in annotations. However, it doesn't mention pagination behavior or rate limits.

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 sentence, front-loaded with core purpose, zero waste. Every word earns its place by specifying resource, scope, and output characteristics efficiently.

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 read-only list tool with excellent annotations (safety covered) and full schema coverage, the description is mostly complete. It adds output context (progress statistics) but lacks output schema, so return format details are missing. Sibling context is adequate.

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 the schema fully documents all 8 parameters. The description adds no additional parameter semantics beyond implying progress stats in output, which doesn't compensate for schema completeness but doesn't detract either.

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 verb ('List') and resource ('milestones for a project or group') with specific scope ('with progress statistics (total/closed issue counts)'). It distinguishes from siblings like 'list_iterations' by focusing on milestones and from 'get_issues' by not returning issues themselves.

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 implies usage for listing milestones with progress stats, but doesn't explicitly state when to use this vs. alternatives like 'search_gitlab' or 'list_iterations'. No guidance on prerequisites or exclusions is provided.

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