Plan budget

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

The description explicitly states the tool is read-only ('Read-only — apply model choices with update_task labels if you want them stuck'), which aligns with the readOnlyHint annotation. It also describes the output and side-effect-free nature, going beyond 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?

The description is a single long paragraph that conveys much information, but it is front-loaded with core functionality. It could be more concise by splitting into separate sections for core vs. optional planLimits behavior.

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 the tool's complexity and absence of an output schema, the description provides a thorough overview including return values and special conditions. It lacks error cases or budget insufficiency handling.

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?

Only 50% of parameters have schema descriptions, but the description adds context for 'days' (greedy load-balance) and explains how parameters affect output. However, 'project' remains undocumented.

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 it maps a token budget onto the open queue before spending, with specific actions like assigning tickets to days and reporting splits. However, it does not explicitly differentiate from sibling tools like 'plan_work' or 'daily_plan'.

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?

It mentions optional sprint restriction and a condition for an enhanced result when planLimits is set. It implies usage right before spending the budget but lacks explicit when-not-to-use or alternative tool mentions.

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