Close sprint & generate reports

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

Annotations indicate idempotent and non-destructive. Description adds beyond: explains refusal behavior, file writing, Slack posting (error tolerance), and rollover modes. No contradiction with annotations.

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 paragraph covers all behaviors without redundancy. Front-loaded with core action. Could benefit from slight structuring (e.g., bullets for modes) but remains efficient and clear.

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?

Comprehensive for a complex tool: covers parameters, conditions, outputs, error handling, and rollover modes. Lacks explicit return shape details but notes 'result shape unchanged with rollover section', which is adequate given no output schema.

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 coverage is 80% (project lacks description). Description greatly enriches parameter understanding: force effect, rolloverMode behavior, nextSprint usage, and output paths. Significantly adds meaning beyond 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 clearly states 'Close a sprint and generate four audience-specific close-out reports' with a specific verb and resource. It distinguishes from siblings like create_sprint and list_sprints by detailing the unique outcomes (reports, rollover handling).

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 when to use (finalize a sprint, generate reports) and provides conditions (refuses with open tickets unless force). It doesn't explicitly list alternatives but context from siblings makes usage clear.

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