Get Tracker queue trigger

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

Annotations already declare readOnly/idempotent/openWorld, so the safety profile is covered. The description goes beyond them by explaining what a trigger actually does ('run actions on an issue when their conditions match') and by routing to the related webhook run log, though it says nothing about permissions or error behavior.

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 tight sentences, front-loaded with the return content and followed by a short domain gloss plus a cross-reference. Nothing is padded, though the final pointer sentence reads as a fragment.

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 compensates by naming the fields returned, and annotations cover the read-only nature. An agent has enough to invoke it correctly, with only minor gaps around permissions and error cases.

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 both parameters (queue key/id and numeric trigger id), so the schema carries the parameter burden. The description only restates 'by id' and adds no format or syntax detail beyond it, matching the baseline for fully documented schemas.

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 trigger by id') and enumerates the payload it returns (actions, firing conditions, order, active flag), which separates it from the create/update/list trigger siblings. It does not explicitly contrast with tracker_triggers_list, so it stops short of full sibling differentiation.

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?

Usage is implied by 'by id' and by the pointer to the webhook run log, but there is no explicit when-to-use guidance or statement of when to prefer tracker_triggers_list instead. The agent must infer the retrieval context.

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