taiga_epics_downvote

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

No annotations are present, so the description must carry the full burden of behavioral disclosure. It only restates the operation name without disclosing authentication requirements, idempotency, error behavior when no vote exists, or whether it affects the current user's vote.

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 sentence, immediately front-loaded, with no filler or redundancy. It earns its place entirely.

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 single-parameter mutation with no output schema or annotations, the description provides minimal but functional guidance. It lacks context about authentication, return values, or when this action is valid, but the simple operation may not require more for basic invocation.

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 coverage is 100%: the single required 'id' parameter includes a description ('Epic ID'). The tool description adds no extra parameter meaning, but the schema fully documents it, so baseline 3 applies.

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 'Remove vote from an epic.' uses a specific verb ('remove') and resource (epic), clearly distinguishing it from sibling tools like taiga_epics_upvote or taiga_epics_voters. It directly states the action without ambiguity.

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?

No explicit when-to-use or alternative guidance is provided; the description only states the action. Usage is implied from the verb, but there is no mention of prerequisites or how it contrasts with taiga_epics_upvote.

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