jira_assign

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries full burden but only states it's for assignment without disclosing behavioral traits like required permissions, side effects (e.g., notifications sent), error handling, or rate limits. It mentions delegation and ownership but doesn't add meaningful operational context beyond the basic action.

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 appropriately sized with two sentences that are front-loaded and efficient, though the second sentence could be more specific. It avoids waste but doesn't achieve maximum impact due to some generality in the usage explanation.

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 the tool's complexity as a mutation tool with no annotations and no output schema, the description is incomplete. It lacks details on return values, error cases, or behavioral nuances, making it inadequate for safe and effective use by an AI agent without additional context.

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 description coverage is 100%, so the input schema fully documents both parameters. The description adds no additional meaning beyond what the schema provides, such as format examples or constraints, resulting in a baseline score of 3 as the schema does the heavy lifting.

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 verb ('assign') and resource ('Jira work item'), specifying what the tool does. It distinguishes from siblings like jira_comment or jira_update_status by focusing on assignment, though it doesn't explicitly contrast with jira_set_field which might handle similar operations.

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 provides implied usage context ('to delegate tasks and clarify ownership'), suggesting when to use it, but lacks explicit guidance on when not to use it or alternatives among siblings. No mention of prerequisites or comparisons to tools like jira_set_field is included.

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