paperclip_get_issue

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

Annotations provide readOnlyHint, but description adds extensive behavior: returns full details, ancestor chain, specific return fields, and error handling (401, 404). No side effects beyond read.

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?

Well-structured with clear sections (Args, Returns, Examples, Error Handling). Each sentence is necessary, no fluff. Front-loaded with main purpose.

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?

Fully covers parameters, return fields, usage guidance, and error cases. No output schema but description enumerates return fields. Complete for a read operation without complex side effects.

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?

Description adds useful context (default format, examples) but contradicts schema: schema marks response_format as required, description says '(optional)'. This inconsistency undermines agent understanding.

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?

Description uses specific verb 'Get' and resource 'issue', and includes 'by ID' and 'full details and ancestor chain'. Clearly distinguishes from list/inbox tools by mentioning 'a single issue'.

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?

Explicitly states 'Use when: reading a specific issue's full state before making changes' and 'Don't use when: you need a list of issues' with named alternatives (paperclip_list_issues, paperclip_get_inbox).

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