jira_get_project

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full burden. It mentions routing and authentication scope but fails to disclose that the tool is read-only, what data is returned, or error conditions. The output schema exists but is not referenced in the description.

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 short but contains redundancy (repeats the tool name and platform path). The 'Args' line is functional. Could be more concise and better structured.

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 existence of siblings (`jira_list_projects`) and the output schema (not shown), the description lacks critical context: how to specify which project, what the response contains, and how it differs from listing projects. This incompleteness hinders effective agent use.

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 sole parameter `arguments` is described as a 'JSON string of arguments' but does not specify required keys (e.g., `projectKeyOrId`) or structure. Schema description coverage is 0%, so the description should fill the gap but fails to do so adequately.

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 it's a Jira operation to get a project, which is clear. However, it does not differentiate from sibling `jira_list_projects` (which lists multiple projects) – both start with 'get_project' vs 'list_projects' but the description doesn't elaborate on the singular nature.

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 on when to use this tool versus alternatives like `jira_list_projects`, `jira_get_issue`, or other Jira tools. No prerequisites or context are provided.

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