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

The only disclosed behavior is 'Key discarded', which hints at non-persistence but is ambiguous because the key is not a defined parameter. With no annotations present, the description leaves most side effects, return behavior, and error cases undisclosed.

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 only two short sentences with no filler or repetition. It is concise, though the brevity comes at the cost of necessary parameter mapping.

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?

The tool cannot be correctly invoked from this description because the Jira key is never mapped to a schema property. There is no output schema, no annotation, and no mention of what the shape check returns, making the definition fundamentally incomplete.

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 schema descriptions individually explain each parameter, so schema coverage is high, but the tool description identifies no parameter that carries the Jira key. This mismatch means the description adds no useful semantics and may actively mislead an agent trying to select the correct argument.

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 states a specific action, 'Check a Jira issue key shape', but it never connects that action to any of the seven input parameters, none of which is named 'key'. 'Key discarded' adds confusion rather than clarity because the key value is never shown to be an input.

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 gives no guidance on when to use this tool versus siblings like domain-shape or github-repo-shape. It neither explains expected inputs nor excludes alternatives.

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