Jira MCP

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries the full burden. It discloses the data source (National Weather Service), forecast duration (next 5 periods covering 2-3 days), and included elements (temperature, wind conditions, descriptions). However, it doesn't mention rate limits, authentication needs, error conditions, or response format details.

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 sentences that are front-loaded with the core purpose and efficiently detail scope and content. Every phrase adds value without redundancy or unnecessary elaboration.

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 moderate complexity (2 required parameters, no annotations, but with output schema), the description provides good coverage of purpose, data source, and forecast content. The existence of an output schema reduces the need to explain return values, but more behavioral context (like rate limits) would enhance completeness.

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 has 0% description coverage, so the description must compensate. It specifies that parameters are 'coordinates' and implies they're used for location-based forecasting, adding meaning beyond the bare schema. However, it doesn't clarify coordinate format (e.g., decimal degrees) or range constraints.

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 verb ('retrieves'), resource ('multi-period weather forecast from the National Weather Service'), and scope ('for the specified coordinates'). It distinguishes from potential siblings by specifying it provides a detailed forecast rather than alerts or current weather.

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 context by specifying 'for the specified coordinates' and mentioning 'detailed forecast,' but doesn't explicitly state when to use this tool versus the 'get_alerts' or 'get_weather' siblings. No explicit alternatives or exclusions are provided.

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