Server Quality Checklist

Tool Scores

• jira_get_my_ticketsB
  3.4/5.0
  Behavior2/5

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

  No annotations are present, so the description carries the full burden. It only states the primary action and scope but does not disclose read-only nature, default statuses, ordering, pagination behavior, or any authentication/rate-limit considerations. The max_results parameter hints at pagination but the description does not elaborate.

  Agents need to know what a tool does to the world before calling it. Descriptions should go beyond structured annotations to explain consequences.

  Conciseness5/5

  Is the description appropriately sized, front-loaded, and free of redundancy?

  The description is a single, focused sentence that directly states the tool's purpose without any filler or repetition. It is appropriately front-loaded and concise.

  Shorter descriptions cost fewer tokens and are easier for agents to parse. Every sentence should earn its place.

  Completeness4/5

  Given the tool's complexity, does the description cover enough for an agent to succeed on first attempt?

  For a simple tool with two optional parameters and no output schema, the description covers the core functionality. However, it lacks usage differentiation from siblings and does not describe the return format or default behavior, which could be important for an agent to fully understand the tool's output.

  Complex tools with many parameters or behaviors need more documentation. Simple tools need less. This dimension scales expectations accordingly.

  Parameters3/5

  Does the description clarify parameter syntax, constraints, interactions, or defaults beyond what the schema provides?

  Schema description coverage is 100%, with clear descriptions for 'status' and 'max_results'. The tool description adds no extra meaning beyond those schema definitions, so the baseline of 3 applies.

  Input schemas describe structure but not intent. Descriptions should explain non-obvious parameter relationships and valid value ranges.

  Purpose5/5

  Does the description clearly state what the tool does and how it differs from similar tools?

  The description clearly states 'Recupera tutti i ticket assegnati all'utente corrente' (Retrieves all tickets assigned to the current user), specifying a concrete action and resource with scope. It distinguishes from siblings by focusing on current-user assignment rather than a single ticket (jira_get_ticket) or general search (jira_search_tickets).

  Agents choose between tools based on descriptions. A clear purpose with a specific verb and resource helps agents select the right tool.

  Usage Guidelines2/5

  Does the description explain when to use this tool, when not to, or what alternatives exist?

  No guidance is provided on when to use this tool versus the siblings. The description does not mention alternatives or contexts where jira_search_tickets might be more appropriate, nor any exclusions or prerequisites.

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

• jira_search_ticketsA
  3.8/5.0
  Behavior2/5

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

  Non sono presenti annotations, quindi la descrizione deve indicare il comportamento. Dice solo che esegue una ricerca con JQL, ma non specifica se è read-only, il formato di ritorno (es. array di ticket), l'ordine, la paginazione o eventuali limiti. Manca trasparenza su aspetti comportamentali rilevanti.

  Agents need to know what a tool does to the world before calling it. Descriptions should go beyond structured annotations to explain consequences.

  Conciseness5/5

  Is the description appropriately sized, front-loaded, and free of redundancy?

  Descrizione in una frase breve con tre esempi immediatamente utili. Nessuna parola superflua, il contenuto è front-loaded e facilmente consultabile.

  Shorter descriptions cost fewer tokens and are easier for agents to parse. Every sentence should earn its place.

  Completeness4/5

  Given the tool's complexity, does the description cover enough for an agent to succeed on first attempt?

  Per uno strumento semplice con due parametri ben documentati e una funzione di ricerca ben exemplificata, la descrizione è quasi completa. Manca però la forma del risultato (output non definito) e un riferimento esplicito ai casi d'uso alternativi, ma il tutto resta comunque utilizzabile.

  Complex tools with many parameters or behaviors need more documentation. Simple tools need less. This dimension scales expectations accordingly.

  Parameters4/5

  Does the description clarify parameter syntax, constraints, interactions, or defaults beyond what the schema provides?

  Lo schema copre al 100% i parametri con descrizioni chiare. La descrizione aggiunge valore con esempi concreti di JQL che chiariscono la sintassi del parametro jql, pur non aggiungendo nulla su max_results oltre allo schema.

  Input schemas describe structure but not intent. Descriptions should explain non-obvious parameter relationships and valid value ranges.

  Purpose5/5

  Does the description clearly state what the tool does and how it differs from similar tools?

  La descrizione usa un verbo specifico ('Cerca') e indica chiaramente l'oggetto ('ticket Jira') e il metodo (JQL). Gli esempi illustrano il tipo di query, differenziando il tool dai sibling come jira_get_ticket e jira_get_my_tickets che non eseguono ricerche libere.

  Agents choose between tools based on descriptions. A clear purpose with a specific verb and resource helps agents select the right tool.

  Usage Guidelines3/5

  Does the description explain when to use this tool, when not to, or what alternatives exist?

  L'uso è implicito: si usa quando si vuole cercare ticket tramite JQL, come mostrato dagli esempi. Tuttavia non vengono esplicitati quando usare questo tool rispetto ai sibling (come jira_get_ticket per un ticket singolo o jira_get_my_tickets per i propri) né le esclusioni.

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

• jira_get_ticketA
  4.1/5.0
  Behavior3/5

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

  With no annotations provided, the description carries the full burden. It states it retrieves details, implying a read-only operation, but does not disclose any additional behavioral traits such as error handling, required permissions, or side effects. The behavior is simple and inferable, so a 3 is appropriate—clear but not rich in context.

  Agents need to know what a tool does to the world before calling it. Descriptions should go beyond structured annotations to explain consequences.

  Conciseness5/5

  Is the description appropriately sized, front-loaded, and free of redundancy?

  The description is a single, concise sentence that contains all essential information: the action, the target, and the parameter format. No filler or redundancy. It is front-loaded with the verb and resource.

  Shorter descriptions cost fewer tokens and are easier for agents to parse. Every sentence should earn its place.

  Completeness5/5

  Given the tool's complexity, does the description cover enough for an agent to succeed on first attempt?

  For a simple retrieval tool with one parameter and no output schema, the description is complete. It tells the agent exactly what the tool does and what input is needed. The lack of output structure is not a gap because the tool's purpose is clear—returning ticket details.

  Complex tools with many parameters or behaviors need more documentation. Simple tools need less. This dimension scales expectations accordingly.

  Parameters3/5

  Does the description clarify parameter syntax, constraints, interactions, or defaults beyond what the schema provides?

  The schema description already covers the parameter fully (Key of the Jira ticket with example IIAB-81069). The tool description repeats the same example, adding no new semantic value beyond what the schema provides. Since schema coverage is 100%, baseline 3 is warranted.

  Input schemas describe structure but not intent. Descriptions should explain non-obvious parameter relationships and valid value ranges.

  Purpose5/5

  Does the description clearly state what the tool does and how it differs from similar tools?

  The description clearly states the action ('Recupera i dettagli' - retrieves the details), the resource (a specific Jira ticket), and the unique identifier (its key). It distinguishes itself from siblings by emphasizing 'specifico tramite la sua chiave', which clearly separates it from searching or getting my tickets.

  Agents choose between tools based on descriptions. A clear purpose with a specific verb and resource helps agents select the right tool.

  Usage Guidelines4/5

  Does the description explain when to use this tool, when not to, or what alternatives exist?

  The description implies the use case: when you have a specific ticket key and need its details. It doesn't explicitly compare with sibling tools (jira_search_tickets, jira_get_my_tickets), but the context is clear enough that this is the tool for a known key. Missing explicit exclusions or alternative recommendations.

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