jira_get_transitions

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

No annotations are provided. The description only states it returns a JSON string of transitions, but does not disclose behavioral traits such as idempotency, required permissions, or that it is a read-only operation. It carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure and falls short.

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 and well-structured, with a clear purpose statement followed by Args and Returns sections. Every sentence adds value with no redundancy.

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 tool is simple and has an output schema, the description is mostly complete. However, it could mention that transitions depend on the current status and is a read operation, which would make it more self-contained.

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 parameter issue_key. The description repeats the parameter role but does not add significant meaning beyond what the schema provides (e.g., format example). Baseline 3 is appropriate.

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 verb 'Get', the resource 'available status transitions', and the target 'Jira issue'. It effectively distinguishes from sibling tool jira_transition_issue which is for performing transitions.

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 does not provide any guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives. It does not mention that it should be used before jira_transition_issue to see valid transitions, nor does it indicate when not to use it.

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