Get New Tickets Tool

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

readOnlyHint=true already tells the agent this is a safe read, so the description's remaining job is lighter. It adds the definitional clarification that 'new' means unassigned, but says nothing about volume, ordering, or pagination behavior for a tool that claims to return 'all' tickets, which is a real gap for a bulk 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?

One short sentence, front-loaded with the verb and scope, with zero filler. Nothing in it is redundant and nothing could be trimmed without losing meaning.

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?

For a simple single-parameter read tool with full schema coverage, an output schema (so return values need no explanation), and a readOnly annotation covering safety, the description is close to sufficient. The only substantive omission is routing guidance relative to the many sibling retrieval tools.

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% and the single optional parameter is fully documented in the schema, so baseline 3 applies. The description's 'optionally filtered by queue' merely restates what the schema already conveys and adds no format or matching semantics.

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 (get tickets) plus a scope qualifier, and usefully defines 'new' as 'unassigned', which an agent could not infer from the name alone. It does not, however, distinguish this from overlapping siblings such as search_tickets_tool or get_my_open_tickets_tool, so the agent must guess whether this is the right entry point.

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?

There is no when-to-use guidance, no prerequisites, and no named alternative, despite a sibling set containing search_tickets_tool and get_my_open_tickets_tool that plausibly return overlapping ticket sets. The queue filter is mentioned but no condition selecting this tool over those is given.

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