jira_fields_get_options

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true, so the description adds value by specifying the return structure (field_id, context_id, options with id/value/disabled) and limiting scope to select/dropdown fields. No contradictions.

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 sentences front-loaded with purpose and immediately followed by field-type specificity and return format. No wasted words; every sentence 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 retrieval tool with two well-documented parameters, annotations, and an explicit return structure, the description covers purpose, usage context, and output format adequately. No gaps identified.

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%, but the description adds useful context: for field_id, it gives an example ('customfield_10001'); for context_id, it explains it comes from jira_fields_get_contexts. This enriches understanding beyond bare schema descriptions.

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 the verb 'Get options' for a specific resource 'custom field in a specific context'. It distinguishes from siblings like jira_fields_manage_options (modifies options) and jira_fields_get_contexts (gets contexts) by specifying that this tool retrieves option values for select/dropdown fields.

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 tells when to use ('For select/dropdown fields') and mentions a prerequisite (context_id from jira_fields_get_contexts). It does not explicitly list exclusions or alternative tools for modification, but the context is clear enough for an agent to infer appropriate use.

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