List Jira Product Discovery Insights

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true, idempotentHint=true, and destructiveHint=false. The description adds valuable behavioral context beyond these annotations: it explains the server resolves internal IDs and ARIs, returns a normalized response, and never exposes raw GraphQL or provider envelopes. This goes beyond what the annotations alone communicate.

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 two sentences: one clear purpose statement and one concise behavioral note. No filler or redundant content, and it is front-loaded with the primary purpose.

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 tool is simple (1 parameter), has an output schema, and has comprehensive annotations. The description covers purpose and behavior adequately, and it does not need to explain return values because the output schema exists. This is complete for the tool's complexity.

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 ideaKey is fully described in the schema with a pattern and description. The tool description's phrase 'for an idea key' adds no new semantic information beyond the schema, so with 100% schema coverage the baseline score of 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 starts with 'List native Jira Product Discovery Insights for an idea key', which uses a specific verb ('List'), a clear resource ('native Jira Product Discovery Insights'), and a precise scope ('for an idea key'). This clearly distinguishes it from generic siblings like jira_get and jira_create_jpd_insight.

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 clearly implies when to use the tool: when you need native Jira Product Discovery Insights for a given idea key. However, it does not explicitly state when not to use it or mention alternative tools, which would elevate it to a 5.

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