Jira Search Issues

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure. It only restates the core search action and adds no context about read-only behavior, JQL error handling, rate limits, pagination behavior, or result characteristics beyond what the schema already conveys.

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 front-loaded sentence with no filler words. It is efficient and readable, though slightly under-specified; that gap is better attributed to contextual completeness rather than to conciseness.

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?

The output schema and 100% parameter documentation make the tool callable from structured data alone. However, the description lacks usage routing to sibling tools and provides no behavioral context beyond the bare operation, making this minimally viable rather than complete.

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 description coverage is 100%, and the schema already documents each parameter well, including a JQL example, pagination token usage, field filtering, and limit bounds. The description itself adds no parameter-level meaning, so the baseline of 3 is appropriate.

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 states a specific verb ('Search'), a resource ('issues'), and a method ('JQL'). This distinguishes it from sibling tools like jira_get_issue, which retrieves a single issue, and create/update/transition operations, though it does not explicitly name those alternatives.

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?

There is no guidance on when to use this tool versus jira_get_issue, jira_list_components, or the Confluence search tools. No exclusions, conditions, or alternative routing are provided, so the agent must infer usage from the tool name rather than from explicit guidance.

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