Create Tickets

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

Adds substantial context beyond annotations: atomic all-or-nothing ('a partial failure creates nothing'), repo-unique id minting, file numbering, key resolution, cycle refusal, and the create flag requirement. These are non-obvious, decision-relevant behaviors an agent cannot infer from the schema or 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?

Two dense sentences with no filler; the purpose is front-loaded, and every clause adds behavioral or parameter insight, from atomicity to cycle refusal.

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?

For a bulk-create tool with dependencies and an all-or-nothing guarantee, the description covers failure semantics, key resolution, effort handling, and ordering. A small gap is the lack of any statement about return values; however, there is no output schema, and the core invocation behavior is fully specified.

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%, so the baseline is 3, but the description enriches parameter meaning by explaining that 'key' is a temporary, never-stored name, that 'blocked_by' can reference such keys, and that ticket order controls numbering. This connects the schema fields to the atomic key-resolution behavior.

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 states a specific verb and resource: 'Publish a whole breakdown in one call' – creating a set of tickets in an Effort atomically. The behaviors described (minting ids, numbering files, resolving keys) clearly differentiate it from siblings like update_ticket or get_tickets.

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 this is the bulk-creation tool ('whole breakdown in one call'), but it does not explicitly state when to prefer it over update_ticket for single changes or how it relates to the other siblings. It does give one concrete conditional: an unknown Effort requires the create flag.

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