jira_fields_search

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

Annotations declare readOnlyHint=true, and the description aligns by stating 'search'. It adds value beyond annotations by detailing the return structure ({total, fields: [...]}) and search options (by name, list all, filter by type). 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?

The description is two efficient sentences plus a return format line. Each sentence earns its place: purpose, usage guidance, and output shape. No wasted words, front-loaded with key information.

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?

All three parameters are documented, and the return shape is described. The output schema exists, so the explanation is sufficient. Could mention pagination or result limit behavior, but overall complete for a search tool.

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%, with each parameter already described. The description partly repeats (e.g., 'Search by field name') but adds minimal extra meaning (e.g., 'Leave empty to list all' is implicit in optionality). Baseline score of 3 is appropriate.

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 verb 'Search' and the resource 'Jira fields (custom and system)'. It explains the purpose: to find field IDs for future reference. This distinguishes it from sibling tools that mutate 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?

The description explicitly says 'Use this to find field IDs... before referencing them in other tools', providing clear context for when to use. It implies a discovery role before mutations, but doesn't explicitly list when not to use or alternatives.

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