jira_search_issues

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

With no annotations, the description must carry the full behavioral disclosure burden. It discloses the default result cap and the rejection of unbounded queries, which are important traits. However, it does not mention pagination via nextPageToken (though the schema covers it), nor explicitly state that this is a read-only operation. The description adds context but remains incomplete for full transparency.

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 two sentences and an example. The IMPORTANT warning is prominent and useful. Every sentence adds value, with no filler or 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?

The description covers the core operation, default limit, and the critical bounded-query constraint. The schema provides parameter details and pagination via nextPageToken. The absence of an output schema is mitigated by the fields parameter that indicates return structure. Minor omissions like ordering and error handling are not critical for this search 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?

Schema coverage is 100%, providing baseline parameter descriptions. The description adds extra value by giving a concrete JQL example and emphasizing the bounded-query requirement, which directly enriches the understanding of the jql parameter. This goes beyond merely repeating schema information.

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 'Search for issues using JQL', specifying the verb (search) and resource (issues). It distinguishes itself from sibling tools like jira_get_issue and jira_get_sprint_issues by focusing on JQL-based search. The example further clarifies the exact usage.

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 usage context, notably that queries must be bounded with a project filter or other restriction, and that results default to 50. It doesn't explicitly mention alternatives, but the JQL constraint is a key practical guideline. This is more than implied usage, but lacks direct exclusions or alternative tool mentions.

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