jira_move_to_sprint

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

Description provides no behavioral details beyond the annotation flags (readOnlyHint=false, openWorldHint=true). No mention of side effects like removing from previous sprint, permissions, or validation.

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?

While short, the description is under-specified and essentially repeats the tool name. It fails to add useful context in a concise manner.

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 simple tool (2 params) and existence of output schema, the description is incomplete. Missing important context such as whether the sprint must be active, what happens to issues already in a sprint, and permission requirements.

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?

Input schema already provides clear descriptions for both parameters (sprint_id and issue_keys). Description adds no additional meaning, so baseline 3 is appropriate.

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 the action 'Move issues into a sprint' with a specific verb and resource. However, it does not differentiate from sibling tools like jira_update_issue or jira_backlog, which could also move issues.

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?

No guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives. Lacks context such as prerequisites (e.g., issues must be in backlog/active sprint) or exclusions.

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