Get Service Desk Queues

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true, so the description doesn't need to restate safety. It adds one useful behavioral fact: the tool is unavailable on Jira Cloud, which will affect invocation. Other behaviors (pagination, error conditions) are not disclosed, but the description is not misleading.

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?

Two short sentences: the first states the core purpose, the second adds a critical platform restriction. No filler or repetition. Information is front-loaded and every word earns its place.

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?

For a simple read-only list operation, the description is nearly sufficient. It states the purpose, gives the essential platform constraint, and an output schema exists (so return details are covered). Missing is a hint about pagination or integration with sibling tools (e.g., getting queue issues), but these gaps are minor given the schema and annotations.

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% – each parameter (limit, start_at, service_desk_id) already has a clear description in the schema. The tool description adds no extra parameter explanation. Baseline 3 is appropriate because 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?

Clearly states it 'Get queues for a Jira Service Desk' – a specific verb and resource. Distinguishes from siblings like jira_get_queue_issues (which gets issues in a queue) and jira_get_service_desk_for_project (which gets the service desk for a project). The platform note adds precision without diluting purpose.

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?

Gives a clear usage constraint: 'Server/Data Center only. Not available on Jira Cloud.' This tells when NOT to use it but does not explicitly compare to alternatives like jira_get_queue_issues or jira_get_service_desk_for_project. No direct sibling differentiation or work-flow guidance is provided.

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