Get Priorities

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

The annotations already include readOnlyHint=true, so the safety profile is clear. The description adds that the priorities are 'available in Yandex Tracker' and 'can be used in issues', which provides minor additional context. There is no contradiction with annotations.

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 a single concise sentence that conveys all necessary information without any extraneous words. It is front-loaded and efficient.

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 that an output schema exists (as indicated by context), the description does not need to detail return values. The description is sufficient for an agent to understand the tool's purpose and invoke it correctly. Minor improvement could be listing the expected fields, but not necessary.

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?

There are no parameters, so the schema coverage is 100%. The description does not need to add parameter details, and it does not. A baseline of 4 is appropriate as no extra param information is needed.

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 tool retrieves all priorities available in Yandex Tracker that can be used in issues. The verb 'Get' and resource 'priorities' are specific, and the scope is well-defined. It distinguishes itself from sibling tools like get_statuses or get_resolutions which serve different lookup purposes.

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 a straightforward statement of what the tool does but does not explicitly guide when to use it over alternatives. Given the simplicity and lack of parameters, the absence of when-not guidance is acceptable but not proactive. A 3 reflects minimal viable guidance.

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