linear_create_issue

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

No annotations are present, and the description fails to disclose behavioral traits like permissions required, side effects (e.g., creating a new record), or rate limits. The agent is left to assume standard creation behavior without confirmation.

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 sentence, making it concise. However, it is too brief and could include additional useful information without becoming verbose.

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 absence of output schema, low schema coverage, and no annotations, the description is insufficient. It does not explain return behavior, error handling, or the effect of the creation, making it incomplete for an agent to confidently use.

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?

With 0% schema description coverage, the description does not clarify the meaning or usage of any parameter (title, description, team_id). For example, team_id is not explained, and its optionality is only inferred from the schema's required field.

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 (create) and the resource (Linear issue). However, it does not distinguish from sibling tools like github_create_issue or notion_create_page, which similarly create items in other systems.

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 guidance is provided on when to use this tool versus alternatives such as github_create_issue or slack_post_message. There are no prerequisites or context signals to help the agent decide.

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