autotask_list_ticket_priorities

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

The description implies a read-only, non-destructive operation. No annotations exist, but the description carries the burden adequately for a simple list tool. It does not disclose any potential side effects or authentication needs, but those are expected to be minimal.

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, no wasted words. The first sentence states the action, the second provides a usage rationale. It is appropriately front-loaded and 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?

For a simple list tool with no parameters and no output schema, the description is fully adequate. It explains what the tool does and why it is useful, without leaving any obvious gaps.

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 zero parameters, and the schema coverage is 100%. Baseline for 0 parameters is 4. The description does not need to add parameter information, and it correctly states the tool's purpose without any parameter details.

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 'List all available ticket priorities' with a specific verb and resource. It distinguishes itself from sibling tools that handle tickets, notes, projects, etc., by focusing solely on priorities.

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?

Explicitly tells when to use the tool: 'Use this to find priority values for filtering or creating tickets.' This provides clear context, though it does not mention alternatives or when not to use it, which is acceptable for a simple lookup tool.

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