Get Backlog Issue

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

With no annotations, the description carries the behavioral burden. It transparently conveys a read-only fetch, which is the core behavior, but does not disclose response shape, error behavior, or permission requirements. For a simple getter this is acceptable but minimal.

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 sentence with no filler. The verb and resource are front-loaded, and every word contributes to 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 one-parameter read tool, the description plus the schema is mostly complete. The only real gap is the absence of an output schema or explicit return-value description, but 'details' adequately signals the response content.

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 input schema fully describes the only parameter, issueKey, with an example format 'PROJ-123'. The description adds no additional parameter semantics, so the baseline score of 3 is appropriate because the schema already carries that information.

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 names a clear operation ('Get details') and a specific resource ('a specific Backlog issue'), going beyond the title. The operation also contrasts with sibling tools like update-issues, bulk-create-tasks, and sync-issues, making selection unambiguous.

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 phrase 'specific Backlog issue' implies this is for single-issue lookups, and the required issueKey parameter reinforces that. However, the description provides no explicit when-to-use versus when-not-to-use guidance or alternative routing; it relies on sibling names for differentiation.

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