get_list_issues

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

No annotations provided, so description carries full burden. Details what the tool retrieves (stacktraces, error patterns, frequencies, timestamps, counts, status). Does not mention side effects, rate limits, or pagination, but for a read-like operation, it is sufficiently transparent.

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?

Single sentence followed by bullet list that is easy to scan. No extraneous information. Well 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?

Tool has 2 optional parameters, no output schema. Description covers functionality well but does not explain what happens if parameters are omitted or describe return value format. Minor 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 covers 100% of parameters with descriptions. Description does not add extra meaning beyond the schema. Baseline of 3 is appropriate as schema is adequate.

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 clearly states 'Retrieve and analyze Sentry issues by project slug' and lists specific use cases like investigating errors and accessing stacktraces. Effectively distinguishes from sibling 'get_sentry_issue' by implying this tool returns a list.

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?

Provides explicit scenarios for when to use the tool via bullet points. Does not explicitly state when not to use, but the contrast with the sibling tool is implicit. Good guidance overall.

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