jev_triage_bug_report

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full disclosure burden, yet it only names the output dimensions. It does not state whether the operation is read-only, what permissions are needed, whether it is deterministic, or any rate/cost characteristics. The output schema covers return shape, but the behavioral profile is essentially undisclosed.

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?

A single front-loaded sentence with no filler; the verb and resource come first and the outputs follow. It is efficient, though its brevity is partly under-specification rather than disciplined conciseness.

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?

An output schema exists so return values need not be described, but with zero annotation coverage and zero parameter documentation the definition is not complete enough for an agent to call the tool confidently. It omits usage context and the meaning of the optional 'context' input.

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 0%, so the description must compensate and does not. 'Supplied bug report' loosely implies the 'report' parameter, but 'context' (an optional free-text field) is never explained — what it should contain, how it influences triage, or whether it is required. This leaves one of two parameters entirely opaque.

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 gives a specific verb ('Triage') and resource ('bug report') and enumerates the outputs ('typed category, impact, and reproduction signals'), so the agent knows precisely what the tool produces. It is distinguishable from siblings like jev_review_code or jev_check_hypothesis, though it never explicitly contrasts itself with them.

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?

There is no statement of when to use this tool versus the five sibling tools, no prerequisites, and no exclusions. An agent must guess whether triage should precede or replace jev_evaluate or jev_check_hypothesis.

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