jira_search

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

No annotations provided, so description carries full burden. It discloses that issue results are 'a trimmed list with refs' by default, explains that `full: true` returns raw API response, and notes mutation actions reject `full: true`. This provides meaningful behavioral context beyond schema, though rate limits and auth are not mentioned.

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 relatively verbose with a multi-paragraph structure. It front-loads the main purpose in the first sentence but then provides detailed action breakdowns that could be more streamlined. Some information repeats across the description and schema.

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 10 parameters, no output schema, and moderate complexity, the description covers the three actions and the `full` flag adequately but lacks full parameter documentation (e.g., `expand`, `nextPageToken`) and return format details beyond 'trimmed list with refs'. This is adequate but has gaps.

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 only 30%, but the description groups parameters per action and explains `full` and `action`. For example, it states 'issues action requires jql; optional fields, expand, startAt, maxResults, nextPageToken'. However, parameters like `expand`, `fieldName`, and `fieldValue` lack explanation beyond basic schema.

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 explicitly states two distinct functions: 'Search Jira issues with JQL or fetch JQL autocomplete metadata.' It distinguishes the tool from siblings like jira_issue and jira_field by focusing on search and autocomplete, not single-issue CRUD.

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 breaks down each action (issues, jqlAutocompleteData, jqlSuggestions) with required and optional parameters, giving clear 'when to use' guidance. It explains the `full` flag usage and notes mutation actions reject it. However, it does not explicitly contrast with sibling tools for when to search vs individual issue retrieval.

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