jira_get_issue

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

The description adds the behavioral detail that comments are included, which is useful. However, with no annotations provided, the description carries the full burden for disclosing read-only nature, permissions, or response format, and it does not explicitly state these aspects beyond the verb 'Get'.

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, complete sentence with no unnecessary words. It is front-loaded with the action and resource, making it concise and easily scannable.

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?

Given the tool's low complexity (one parameter, no output schema, no annotations), the description covers the primary purpose and a key aspect (comments). It does not discuss error handling or permission requirements, but these are not critical for a straightforward GET operation.

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?

The schema provides the issueKey parameter with a pattern but no description. The description adds meaning by saying 'by key', indicating the parameter is the Jira issue key. This compensates for the 0% schema description coverage, though briefly.

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 ('Get'), the resource ('Jira issue'), and the access method ('by key'). It also highlights that comments are included, which differentiates it from related tools like jira_search_issues and jira_list_comments.

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 implies usage when an issue key is known, but it does not explicitly mention when to use this tool versus alternatives like jira_search_issues or jira_list_comments. No explicit exclusions or alternative recommendations are given.

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