List Tracker queue required fields

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint, idempotentHint and openWorldHint, so the safety profile is covered. The description adds that each field carries a required flag, its schema and options, which is useful context about the payload, but adds no auth, pagination or scoping caveats beyond that.

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 with no filler, and the content of the response is front-loaded before the usage guidance. Efficient, though the first sentence is a fragment rather than a full clause.

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 read-only list tool with one fully documented parameter and no output schema, the description adequately conveys what is returned and why to call it. No pagination or auth note, but nothing critical is missing for correct invocation.

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% with a single well-documented queue_id (accepts key or numeric id). The description's 'queue's' phrasing adds nothing beyond the schema, so baseline 3 applies.

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?

States a specific resource scope — the queue's required/local fields — and enumerates the returned attributes (schema, options, display order). The word 'queue's' implicitly distinguishes it from tracker_fields_list / tracker_localfields_list, which operate on other scopes, though it never names those siblings.

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?

Gives clear usage context: 'Use this to learn which fields an issue in the queue expects ... before creating or updating issues there.' This is a genuine when-to-use directive tied to a downstream action (issue creation/update), though it names no explicit alternative tool or exclusion.

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