List Migration Issues

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

The readOnlyHint annotation already indicates it is a read operation, and the description 'List issues' is consistent with that. No additional behavioral context (e.g., side effects, rate limits) is provided, but the annotation covers the essential safety aspect.

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 a single, concise sentence that directly states the purpose without unnecessary words or repetition. It is well-structured and easy to understand.

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?

The description sufficiently explains what the tool does for a simple list operation. It does not mention pagination or filtering, but these are not critical for a basic listing endpoint. The absence of an output schema means no return format explanation is required, so the description is complete enough for a straightforward tool.

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?

The schema provides clear descriptions for both parameters (course_id and migration_id), so the description does not need to add much. The description adds no further semantics beyond what the schema already includes, but the schema coverage is complete for the required properties.

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 clearly states the tool's function: listing issues from a content migration, and specifies the nature of each issue (type and description). It distinguishes itself from sibling tools by targeting migration issues specifically.

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 implies usage when you need to view migration issues, but it does not explicitly mention when to choose this over alternatives or provide context such as prerequisites or typical scenarios. The instruction is straightforward but lacks explicit guidance on when not to use it.

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