readLinearIssue

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden. The verb 'Retrieves' clearly indicates a read-only operation with no side effects, which is sufficient for a simple retrieval. However, it does not disclose error behavior (e.g., invalid issue ID) or any potential limits on returned data.

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 front-loads the verb and resource. It efficiently lists key data points without unnecessary detail, earning its place with zero waste.

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 low complexity (one parameter, no output schema), the description gives a reasonable overview of what the tool returns by enumerating key fields. It lacks specifics on pagination or exact structure, but this is acceptable for a simple retrieval tool.

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 schema provides a clear description for issueId with 100% coverage. The tool description adds minimal extra meaning beyond rephrasing 'from the specified Linear issue.' No additional format or example is given, so it meets the baseline but does not exceed it.

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 action (Retrieves), the resource (Linear issue), and the scope (specified issue). It lists the specific data fields (assignee, state, labels, comments, related data), which differentiates it from sibling tools like listLinearIssues or readLinearProject.

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 implies the tool is used when you need comprehensive details of a single Linear issue. However, it does not explicitly state when to use it over alternatives, such as listLinearIssues for lists or readLinearProject for project-level details.

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