Get Tracker queue

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

Annotations already cover safety (readOnlyHint, idempotentHint, openWorldHint), so the description's job is to add context. It does: it lists what the call actually returns (owner, default type/priority) and what expand unlocks, which goes beyond the annotation set. It does not mention auth requirements or error cases, keeping it short of a 5.

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, both front-loaded: identity/selector first, then return-shape detail and sibling routing. No filler or restated title text.

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?

With no output schema, the description carries the burden of describing returns and does so for the base case and the expand case. It stops short of full completeness (no note on missing-queue behavior), but nothing essential to invoking it correctly is absent.

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 coverage is 100%, so the baseline is 3. The description goes further by explaining the semantic effect of the expand flag ('its issue types, versions, team, workflows and per-type resolution config'), giving meaning the schema's comma-list enumeration does not convey.

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 verb and resource ('One queue's settings and configuration') and a precise selector ('by key or id'). It explicitly distinguishes itself from the sibling tool that could be confused with it, so an agent can route without opening either schema.

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?

Names the alternative ('Sibling queues_list enumerates every queue') and tells the agent exactly how to obtain the input ('pass one of its key values here'). This is explicit when-to-use and how-to-source-the-argument guidance.

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