jira_attachment

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

With no annotations, the description fully informs behavior: it explains that 'add' uploads local files by path (server reads bytes), warns against passing contents, and clarifies that 'full: true' is only for read actions and rejected by mutation actions. It also mentions the streaming downloader alternative.

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 concise and front-loaded, but the input schema repeats the same text in the 'description' field, leading to redundancy. Otherwise, it is well-organized with clear action breakdown.

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?

Given no output schema, the description adequately covers all actions, parameters, and behavioral nuances. It addresses reading vs mutation, file handling, and the streaming alternative, making it complete for an agent to use correctly.

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?

Despite 60% schema coverage, the description adds crucial meaning: it explains each action's required parameters, the purpose of 'attachmentId' for get/delete, and the behavior of 'full'. It clarifies that 'filePath' should be a local path, not contents, which the schema's description does not fully capture.

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 'Add, inspect, or delete attachments,' with explicit verb+resource. It distinguishes actions via the 'action' enum and contrasts with the streaming downloader for downloading bytes, differentiating from sibling tools like jira_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?

The description specifies when to use each action (add, get, delete, meta) and prerequisites like required parameters. It also notes that to download bytes one should use the streaming downloader. However, it lacks explicit guidance on when not to use this tool in favor of others, though the action enum provides context.

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