create_issue

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

No annotations are provided, so the description bears full responsibility for behavioral disclosure. It only states the action without explaining side effects, required permissions, error handling, or idempotency. A create operation could have implications (e.g., rate limits, notifications) that are not mentioned.

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?

Single sentence with no fluff. Every word is necessary. The structure is front-loaded with action and resource.

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 simplicity and the existence of an output schema, the description is mostly complete. However, it lacks any usage context or behavioral notes that could help an agent decide when to use it.

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%, meaning all parameters have descriptions in the input schema. The description adds no additional semantic value beyond what the schema already provides. Baseline score of 3 is appropriate.

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 clearly states the action ('Create a new issue') and the resource ('in a GitHub repository'). It is specific and distinguishes from sibling tools like add_issue_comment or create_pr.

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?

No explicit when-to-use or when-not-to-use guidance. While the use case is straightforward, the description does not mention prerequisites, alternatives, or scenarios where this tool is inappropriate.

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