jira_add_attachment

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

The description discloses token cost implications for content vs fileUrl, and explains the isBase64 parameter. It describes return metadata and how to reference images. This goes beyond the minimal annotations (readOnlyHint: false) to provide full behavioral context.

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 well-structured with clear sections, bullet points, and examples. Every sentence provides essential information without redundancy. It is concise yet comprehensive.

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 complex tool with 5 parameters and no output schema, the description fully covers usage, trade-offs, token costs, and return value (attachment metadata with ID and download URL). No gaps in understanding for the agent.

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 100% schema description coverage, the description adds significant value: token cost estimates, usage recommendations for fileUrl vs content, and explanation of isBase64 default behavior. This helps the agent understand parameter trade-offs beyond the 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 clearly states 'Uploads an attachment (image, document, etc.) to a Jira issue.' It distinguishes between two methods (fileUrl vs content) and provides token cost warnings, making the purpose unambiguous and differentiating from sibling tools like jira_get_attachments or jira_delete_attachment.

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?

Explicit guidance on when to use each method: 'EFFICIENT METHOD (recommended for large files)' with fileUrl, and 'DIRECT METHOD (for small files)' with content. It also warns about token costs and provides examples, helping the agent choose correctly.

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