jira_search

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

No annotations are provided, so the description must disclose behavior. It correctly implies a read-only search operation but does not explicitly state safety (e.g., read-only nature), authentication needs, or rate limits. The returned fields are mentioned, adding some transparency.

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 a single concise sentence that front-loads the key action (search JIRA via JQL) and lists returned fields. No unnecessary 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?

The description covers the basic functionality but lacks deeper context such as how to construct JQL queries (though the param description provides an example), potential errors, or pagination behavior. Without an output schema, the return format is only partially described.

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 schema already describes each parameter. The description does not add additional meaning to the parameters beyond what is in the schema. The output fields are mentioned, but not parameter semantics.

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 searches JIRA issues using JQL queries and lists the returned fields (id, key, summary, status, assignee, priority). This distinguishes it from siblings like jira_get_issue (single issue) and jira_create_issue (creation).

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 tool uses JQL but does not provide explicit guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives (e.g., jira_get_issue for single issues, confluence_search for Confluence). No when-not-to-use advice is given.

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