edit_issue

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

No annotations provided, so description carries full burden. Discloses default field, failure behavior for missing/ambiguous old_string, and cost comparison. Could mention side effects or reversion, but adequate.

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?

Three concise sentences, front-loaded with main purpose, then defaults, then constraints. No unnecessary words, each sentence earns its place.

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?

No output schema, but tool is simple. Description covers key aspects: purpose, defaults, constraints, alternative. Could add return format or example, but complete enough for a 5-param 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% (baseline 3). Description adds context: 'field' default, 'old_string' uniqueness requirement, 'replace_all' default false. Adds value beyond schema.

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?

Clearly states the action (edit an issue by replacing an exact string) and the resource (issue), with default targeting description and optional title. Distinguishes from sibling update_issue by noting it's cheaper for small changes.

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?

Explicitly mentions when to use ('small changes'), failure conditions (missing or ambiguous old_string unless replace_all=true), and provides an alternative (update_issue). Guides agent effectively.

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