Open local diagnostic issue

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

Annotations provide readOnlyHint=false and destructiveHint=false, indicating a non-destructive write. The description adds critical context by confirming the operation is purely local (SQLite database) and has no effect on the vehicle. This goes beyond the annotations to prevent misunderstandings.

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 two sentences long with no redundant information. It is front-loaded with the core action and scope, making it easy to scan. Every word serves a purpose.

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 presence of an output schema (which likely documents return values), the description covers the essential behavioral aspects: local creation and lack of vehicle effect. It could be enhanced by hinting at what the output contains (e.g., issue ID), but overall it is sufficiently complete for a straightforward create operation.

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 0%, so the description should compensate by explaining parameters. However, the description does not mention any of the five parameters (vehicle_id, title, severity, dtc_codes, description) or their meanings. The parameter names are somewhat self-explanatory, but without any elaboration, the description fails to add value for proper usage.

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 a specific verb ('Create'), identifies the resource ('issue'), and clarifies the scope ('only in the local SQLite database'). This distinguishes the tool from sibling tools which are all read operations.

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 explicitly states that the operation never sends a vehicle command or changes vehicle state, providing clear guidance on when to use it (local issue logging) and implied when not to (if vehicle state change is needed). No explicit exclusions or alternative tools are mentioned, but the context is clear.

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