jira_bulk_transition_issues

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

Annotations already indicate destructiveHint=true (mutation). Description adds that it automates transition ID resolution, returns {success, transitioned_count, target_status}, and imposes a precondition. It doesn't cover partial failure behavior or the effect of send_notification, but overall provides additional useful context beyond annotations.

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?

Description is three short sentences, each conveying essential information: action, precondition, and behavior/return. No redundant words, front-loaded with the core purpose.

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?

Description covers purpose, precondition, automation, and return structure. Output schema exists to further detail returns. Minor omission: no mention of send_notification behavior, but that is documented in the parameter schema. Overall sufficient for the tool's complexity.

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%, so baseline 3. Description adds that 'All issues must have an available transition to the target status', clarifying the constraint on target_status, and explains automatic resolution of transition IDs, which is not obvious from the schema alone.

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?

Description clearly states 'Bulk transition multiple issues to a new status', specifying verb (transition), resource (issues), and scope (multiple). It distinguishes from the sibling tool jira_issues_transition which handles single issues.

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?

Description provides a clear precondition (all issues must have available transition to target status) and states that transition IDs are resolved automatically. However, it does not explicitly advise when to use this tool versus alternatives or mention exclusion scenarios (e.g., mixed transitions).

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