Move Issues to Backlog

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

The description explicitly states it moves issues and removes from sprints, matching the readOnlyHint=false annotation. It also adds context by documenting that a ValueError is raised in read-only mode or if the Jira client is unavailable, which provides additional behavioral insights beyond the annotations.

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 and well-structured with clear sections: a one-sentence summary, then Args, Returns, and Raises. Every sentence is informative and no word is wasted.

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 one parameter and an output schema, the description is fairly complete. It covers the core action, parameter format, return value, and error conditions. However, it could provide more detail on output structure or side effects (e.g., impact on sprint planning).

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 only parameter, issue_keys, is fully described in the input schema (100% coverage). The description repeats this information but adds no new semantics. The presence of an internal 'ctx' parameter in the description (not in the schema) is minor noise but does not add meaningful guidance.

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 action ('Move issues to the backlog') and its effect ('removing them from any sprint'). The verb 'move' and resource 'issues' are specific, and the effect distinguishes it from siblings like jira_add_issues_to_sprint.

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 does not provide guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives (e.g., jira_add_issues_to_sprint). It lacks prerequisites, such as requiring an authenticated session, and does not mention cases where the tool should not be used.

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