list_statuses_and_priorities

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

No annotations are provided, so the description must convey safety and behavior. The verb 'List' implies a read-only operation, and 'available on this instance' clarifies the scope. However, it does not explicitly state that no data is modified or describe any response characteristics, leaving some ambiguity.

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?

A single sentence that is direct and front-loaded with the verb, wasting no words.

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 the tool's simplicity (no parameters, no nested objects) and the presence of an output schema, the description sufficiently covers the necessary context. It states the resource types and scope, which is complete for this 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?

With zero parameters, the input schema is trivially covered, and the description need not elaborate on parameter semantics. The baseline score of 4 applies.

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 uses the specific verb 'List' and explicitly names the resources 'issue statuses and priority levels' plus the scope 'on this instance.' This clearly identifies the tool's function and distinguishes it from sibling list tools like list_trackers and list_custom_fields, which target different data types.

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 implies the tool is for discovering available statuses and priorities on the current instance, which is appropriate for validation or display purposes. However, it provides no explicit when-to-use or when-not-to-use guidance, nor does it mention any alternative tools. For a simple zero-parameter listing tool, this context is sufficient.

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