jira_create_issue

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the burden. It discloses one behavioral trait (placement is ignored for subtasks) but does not mention prerequisites, permissions, side effects, or response behavior. It adds some context beyond the schema but not comprehensive for a write operation.

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?

Two sentences, front-loaded with the core action, and the second sentence efficiently conveys the subtask exception. No unnecessary words or repetition.

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 tool has 6 params but the schema covers all with descriptions. The description adds the key subtask behavior and is sufficient for routine use. It lacks mention of return values or error conditions, but given the rich schema and simple create operation, it is mostly complete.

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 description coverage is 100%, so the baseline is 3. The description repeats schema-specified facts (parentId for subtasks, placement not used for subtasks) without adding new semantic details. It reinforces but does not extend parameter understanding.

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 tool creates a new Jira issue with specific verb and resource ("Create a new Jira issue"), enumerates supported issue types (Task, Bug, Story, Subtask), and differentiates itself from siblings like jira_update_issue and jira_fetch_issue. The subtask nuance adds precision.

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?

It provides clear context on when to use this tool (creating issues) and gives specific parameter guidance for subtasks (provide parentId, placement ignored). It does not explicitly name alternatives, but the purpose is unambiguous against the sibling list, and the subtask usage is directionally helpful.

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