Read sprint reports

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

Annotations already indicate readOnlyHint=true, so the description adds value by detailing the conditional output shapes (list, manifest, markdown) and the source (close_sprint reports). This goes beyond the safety signal to explain dynamic behavior.

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?

Three concise sentences, each covering a distinct usage scenario. Front-loaded with the purpose, no unnecessary words. Every sentence adds value.

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 no output schema, the description explains the return types reasonably: list of sprints, manifest+audiences, markdown. Minor gap: the term 'manifest' is not defined, but the overall completeness for a read tool is high.

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?

The description adds meaning for sprint (omit to list) and audience (which report), but the required 'project' parameter lacks explanation both in the schema and description. With 67% schema coverage, the description partially compensates but leaves a gap for project.

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?

Description clearly states it reads close-out reports from close_sprint and distinguishes three distinct behaviors based on parameter presence: listing sprints, showing manifest+audiences, or returning a specific audience report. This specificity differentiates it well from sibling get tools.

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 implicitly guides usage by explaining what happens with different parameter combinations (no sprint, sprint only, sprint+audience). It does not explicitly state when to avoid or provide alternatives, but the use cases are clear enough for an agent to choose correctly.

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