create_issue

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

No annotations provided, so description must cover behavioral traits. It discloses that title is required, labels are IDs, and that the created issue is returned with its number. However, it lacks details on permissions, side effects, or error handling.

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?

Three sentences, front-loaded with the main action. Every sentence adds value without redundancy. Highly concise.

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?

No output schema, but description mentions return includes number. With 8 parameters and 1 required, it covers key fields (title, labels, assignees). Omits explanation of optional fields like body, repo, owner, milestone, but schema already covers them.

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 coverage is 100%, baseline 3. Description adds value by clarifying that labels are numeric IDs and advising to call list_labels first, and that assignees is an array of usernames. This goes beyond schema descriptions.

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?

Description clearly states 'Create an issue' with a specific verb and resource. It distinguishes from sibling tools like update_issue or delete_issue by focusing on creation.

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?

Provides guidance on using list_labels to map label names to IDs, and mentions add_issue_labels as an alternative for adding labels by name. Does not explicitly state when not to use this tool, but context is clear.

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