Get All Queues

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true, indicating a safe read operation. The description adds minimal behavioral context beyond that, such as the fact that it filters by user availability. It does not discuss potential performance implications or pagination behavior, but the annotation covers the key safety aspect.

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 sentence that efficiently conveys the core purpose without extraneous detail. It is appropriately front-loaded and every word contributes meaning.

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 and the input schema is well-documented, the description is minimally sufficient. However, it does not mention important context about potentially large result sets or how to handle context window limits, which are hinted in the parameter descriptions.

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 input schema provides full descriptions for all 3 parameters (fields, page, per_page) with 100% coverage. The description does not add any additional semantic value or usage guidance for the parameters beyond what is already in the 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?

The description clearly states the verb 'Find', the resource 'all Yandex Tracker queues', and the scope 'available to the user'. It also clarifies the domain-specific term 'queue' as analogous to a project. This distinguishes it from sibling tools that operate on different resources like issues or users.

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 does not provide explicit guidance on when to use this tool versus alternative tools for retrieving queue-related data (e.g., queue_get_fields, queue_get_metadata). It only implies usage for listing all queues, but lacks context about use cases or when not to use it.

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