a2atlassian

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

No annotations provided, so description carries full burden. Fails to disclose this is a destructive/write operation, requires specific Jira permissions (workflow transition rights), or that it triggers workflow post-functions. 'Transition' implies change but lacks explicit behavioral context.

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?

Two sentences, zero waste. Front-loaded with the core action, followed immediately by the critical prerequisite. Every word 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?

Minimum viable for a workflow tool with output schema present. Core function and prerequisite stated, but gaps remain: no mention of permission requirements, workflow constraints, or parameter semantics given the completely undocumented schema.

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 has 0% description coverage. Description compensates minimally—only implicitly hints at transition_id source via the usage guideline. Project, issue_key, and format parameters remain completely undocumented with no types, formats, or examples provided.

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?

Clear verb ('Transition') + resource ('Jira issue') + outcome ('new status'). Distinguishes from jira_get_transitions by implying execution vs. discovery, though it doesn't explicitly characterize this as a state mutation or workflow operation.

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?

Excellent prerequisite guidance: explicitly directs users to 'Use jira_get_transitions to discover available transitions' before invoking this tool, establishing clear sequencing with the sibling tool.

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