Get Queue Issues

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

With readOnlyHint=true annotation already indicating safety, the description adds valuable context about platform availability (Server/Data Center only, not Cloud) and the specific source (service desk queue). This goes beyond the annotation without contradicting it.

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 short sentences, with the core action front-loaded and no unnecessary words. Every word adds value, making it an excellent example of conciseness.

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, with a complete schema, output schema, and read-only annotation. The description's focus on the action and platform constraint is sufficient for an agent to use it correctly without any missing critical information.

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 schema fully documents all four parameters including types, defaults, and constraints. The description adds no parameter-specific details, matching the baseline for high schema coverage.

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 issues from a Jira Service Desk queue, using a specific verb and resource. It distinguishes itself from sibling tools like jira_search (search issues) and jira_get_board_issues (board issues) by targeting service desk queues specifically.

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 clear context by stating it is for Server/Data Center only and not available on Jira Cloud, helping the agent know when it is applicable. However, it does not explicitly mention alternatives or when to choose this over other issue-listing tools, so it lacks explicit exclusions or comparisons.

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