jira_get_all_projects

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

With no annotations, the description carries full burden. It discloses that only accessible projects are returned, keys are uppercase, include_archived filter, and the optional env-var filter. It also notes the ValueError for client issues. This is good, though it omits details on pagination or side effects.

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 concise with 5-6 sentences, structured with clear Args, Returns, and Raises sections. Every sentence adds value, and the most critical information is front-loaded.

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 simple tool (one optional param, no side effects) and the presence of an output schema, the description covers the main aspects: behavior, return format, and exception. It does not mention pagination or rate limits, but for this tool it is adequate.

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 coverage is 100% for the single boolean parameter, so baseline is 3. The description's Args section restates 'include_archived' but adds no additional semantic meaning beyond the schema. The context about JIRA_PROJECTS_FILTER is related but not a parameter.

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 'Get all Jira projects' with the scope 'accessible to the current user.' It also specifies important details like uppercase keys and filtering via environment variable, making the tool's purpose distinct from sibling tools that focus on specific issues or projects.

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 mentions the effect of JIRA_PROJECTS_FILTER but does not explicitly state when to use this tool versus alternatives (e.g., when to use jira_get_project_issues instead). There is no guidance on exclusion or comparison, though the unique purpose is clear.

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