Get Queue Metadata

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true, and the description adds context by describing the kind of data returned (name, description, default type/priority, and optional expanded data). It also clarifies the practical use of the expand option for issue_close. No contradictions with annotations are present.

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 two sentences long, front-loaded with the verb and resource. Every sentence earns its place—the first states the core purpose, the second gives a concrete usage tip. No wasted words.

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 output schema exists and the annotations mark this as read-only, the description doesn't need to explain return structure or side effects. It covers the tool's core behavior and the key expand option, making it complete for an agent to select and invoke correctly.

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. The description goes beyond the schema by explaining the semantic purpose of the 'issueTypesConfig' expand value, specifically its relationship to the issue_close tool. This adds meaningful value to the parameter understanding.

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 tool gets 'detailed metadata about a specific Yandex Tracker queue,' using a specific verb and resource. It distinguishes this from sibling tools like queue_get_tags or queue_get_versions, which fetch narrower sub-resources, and queues_get_all, which lists all queues.

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 provides clear context for when to use the tool: when you need metadata for a specific queue. It also gives an explicit usage directive: 'Use expand=["issueTypesConfig"] to get available resolutions for issue_close tool.' While it doesn't explicitly list alternatives, the scope is well-defined and the example is actionable.

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