list_attachments

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries the burden of behavioral disclosure. It adds useful context by stating 'Returns trimmed metadata only,' indicating the output is not full attachment details. However, it does not elaborate on what 'trimmed' excludes, nor any auth or rate-limit considerations, 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?

The description is two short sentences, front-loaded with the primary action and a concise qualifier. Every word earns its place; there is no fluff or redundancy.

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 a single parameter and an output schema, the description is mostly complete. It conveys the core purpose and output granularity. However, it could clarify what 'trimmed' means or mention lack of pagination/ordering, but the presence of an output schema reduces the need for return-value details.

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% for the single parameter 'issue_id' with description 'Task UUID.' The tool description adds no extra parameter semantics beyond the schema, so the baseline score 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 uses a specific verb ('List') and resource ('file attachments on a task'), clearly distinguishing it from sibling tools like upload_attachment, delete_attachment, and get_attachment_url. The additional phrase 'Returns trimmed metadata only' further sharpens the scope.

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?

Clear context is provided: this tool is for listing file attachments on a task. However, it does not explicitly mention when not to use it or name alternative tools, such as using get_attachment_url for full metadata or upload_attachment for adding files.

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