list_milestones

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

Annotations already indicate readOnlyHint: true and openWorldHint: true, so the description adds no new behavioral traits beyond confirming it's a read operation. No contradictions, but minimal added value.

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, front-loaded sentence of 9 words with no wasted text. It efficiently conveys the core functionality.

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?

While the description covers the main action and filter, it does not mention pagination parameters (page/limit) or that results are paginated. Given the output schema exists and annotations provide safety context, the description is minimally adequate but could be improved.

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 100%, with each parameter having a description. The description adds the context of optional state filtering, but parameter meanings are already clear from the schema, so baseline 3 applies.

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 action (list) and resource (milestones in a repository), and the resource name distinguishes it from siblings like list_branches or list_issues. However, it could be more specific about scope, e.g., 'list milestones for a given repository'.

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, and the optional state filter is noted. However, no explicit guidance is given on when to use this tool versus alternatives (e.g., other list tools), but the sibling tools are for different entities, so context is somewhat clear.

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