redmine_set_parent_issue

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries full burden. It notes that parent/child is a field not a relation record, and honors read-only flag. Missing details on permissions, side effects, or response format.

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 concise (~70 words), well-structured with args section, and every sentence adds value without redundancy.

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 simple tool with 2 integer params and an output schema, the description covers core behavior, special unparent value, and field nature. Missing error conditions or permissions, but adequate.

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 description coverage is 0%, but the description fully explains both parameters: issue_id as 'issue whose parent is being set' and parent_issue_id as 'numeric id of the new parent. Pass 0 to unparent.' This adds essential meaning beyond schema names.

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 'Set or clear an issue's parent' uses specific verb+resource, clearly indicating the tool's action on issues. It distinguishes from siblings like update_issue or relation tools.

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 explains the special value 0 to unparent and mentions honoring REDMINE_MCP_READ_ONLY, providing clear context. However, it does not explicitly compare with alternative tools like update_issue that might also set parent.

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