jira_get_priorities

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

Annotations already indicate readOnlyHint=true, and the description uses 'Retrieves' which is consistent. No other behavioral traits like authentication needs or rate limits are mentioned. The description adds minimal insight beyond what annotations provide.

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, well-structured sentence that conveys the purpose and output effectively without any unnecessary words.

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?

The tool is simple and the description covers all necessary information: what it does, sample values, and returned fields. No output schema is present, but the description adequately conveys the return structure.

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 has zero parameters, so no parameter documentation is needed. The description adds value by specifying what is returned (IDs, names, descriptions), which goes beyond the empty 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 the tool retrieves priorities and lists specific examples (e.g., Highest, High) and return fields (IDs, names, descriptions). It distinguishes itself from sibling tools like jira_get_issue_types or jira_get_statuses by focusing solely on priorities.

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 does not explicitly provide when or when not to use this tool, nor does it mention any prerequisites or alternatives. However, given the simplicity of the tool (no parameters, read-only), the lack of extensive guidelines is acceptable but still leaves room for improvement.

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