Create Redmine Issue

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the burden of disclosing behavior. It does disclose the write requirement (REDMINE_ENABLE_WRITE=true), which signals a mutating operation. However, it does not explain side effects, return values, or failure modes, leaving significant transparency gaps.

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, front-loaded sentence that states both the purpose and the critical prerequisite. It is minimal and avoids unnecessary elaboration, making it easy to parse.

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 complexity (14 parameters, no output schema, no annotations), the description is far from complete. It omits expected return values, error semantics, parameter formatting, and context on how the write flag interacts with functionality, leaving the agent under-informed.

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% for 14 parameters, and the description provides no parameter-level information. The agent must infer semantics solely from parameter names like 'project_id' and 'subject', which is insufficient for correct invocation of a complex create operation.

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 'Redmine issue', which is specific and distinguishes it from sibling tools like list_projects, search_issues, and add_issue_note. The verb+resource structure is precise and unambiguous.

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?

The description provides a prerequisite (REDMINE_ENABLE_WRITE=true) but does not explicitly state when to use this tool versus alternatives. Usage is implied by the tool name and the sibling context, but no when-not or alternative guidance is given.

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