Create work package

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

No annotations are provided, so the description must fully disclose behavioral traits. It only mentions creation and date formatting, but omits side effects (e.g., notifications, permissions needed), return value, error handling, or confirmation behavior.

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 very concise at two sentences, with the purpose stated first and no extraneous information. Every sentence adds value.

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 (12 parameters, no output schema, no annotations), the description is too brief. It lacks guidance on optional fields, return format, error conditions, or permissions. The phrase 'When patching dates' is misleading for a creation tool.

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 description reinforces required parameters and adds date format guidance beyond the schema. However, schema coverage is 50% and the description does not add meaning for many parameters (e.g., description, statusId, priorityId, etc.) beyond what the schema already provides.

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 ('work package in a project'), distinguishing it from sibling tools like 'op_update_work_package' or 'op_delete_work_package'. It also lists the minimum required fields.

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 clear instructions on required parameters and date format, but does not explicitly state when to use this tool over alternatives or when not to use it. The context is clear from the tool name.

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