create_issue

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure. It only says 'Create a new issue' and clarifies the labels format; it does not mention permissions, side effects, failure modes, or response behavior. This is a minimal but not misleading disclosure.

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 highly concise: two short sentences with no filler. The purpose statement is front-loaded, and the labels clarification earns its place by adding value beyond the schema.

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 schema and output schema cover required and optional parameters and the return shape, so the description need not repeat those. The missing elements are when-to-use guidance and behavioral context such as permission requirements or label ID validation, which leave minor gaps for an agent.

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 schema has 0% description coverage, so the description must compensate. It usefully clarifies that labels should be numeric label IDs, resolving the anyOf type ambiguity in the schema. However, it leaves the other five parameters without any semantic explanation, though most are self-explanatory from their names.

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 states a specific verb and resource ('Create a new issue'), which clearly distinguishes it from sibling update/comment tools. The added note about labels provides useful context, but the description does not explicitly differentiate it from related issue actions.

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 given about when to use this tool versus alternatives like update_issue or create_issue_comment. The only implied usage is that the verb 'Create' suggests a new resource, but there are no explicit conditions or exclusions.

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