jira_get_create_meta

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

The description's 'Retrieves' aligns with readOnlyHint annotation. It adds behavioral details (shows required vs optional, field types, allowed values) beyond annotations, but doesn't disclose any edge cases or constraints like pagination. The annotation already covers the safety profile, so description meets the lowered bar.

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 two clear, front-loaded sentences with no unnecessary words. Every sentence adds value: first states the core action, second specifies usage timing.

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 no output schema, the description adequately explains the return information (fields, required/optional, types, allowed values). It is sufficient for the agent to understand the tool's output and purpose, though it could mention that the output is a structured metadata object.

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 coverage is 100%, so the baseline is 3. The description adds the phrase 'including custom fields' which is not in the schema, providing minor extra meaning. However, it does not elaborate on parameter syntax or format beyond what the schema provides.

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 specifies the verb 'Retrieves' and the resource 'create metadata for a project', and explains what it shows (fields, required vs optional, types, allowed values). It distinguishes itself from sibling tools like jira_create_issue and jira_get_custom_fields by positioning itself as a preparatory step.

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 explicitly says 'Use this before creating issues to discover what fields are needed', providing clear usage context. It does not list when not to use or explicitly name alternatives, but the usage guidance is strong enough for an agent.

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