Recent bug reports

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint, openWorldHint, idempotentHint. Description adds useful behavioral context: ordering (newest first), default limit and max, and that project_id defaults to server-configured project. 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 concise, front-loaded with the main action and return type, then details filters and usage guidance. Every sentence adds value without redundancy.

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 output schema, full parameter coverage, and annotations, the description is complete. It covers purpose, usage, parameters, and sibling differentiation with no apparent gaps.

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 individual parameter descriptions. The description adds context: lists filter values, defaults, constraints (limit max 100), and for project_id explains its purpose and how to obtain IDs via other tools. Adds significant value beyond schema.

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 'List recent bug reports for a project, newest first.' It specifies the return shape and explicitly differentiates from siblings: 'for one report use get_report_detail, to find a bug by text use search_reports.'

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?

Directly states when to use: 'Use to survey open reports' and provides explicit alternatives: 'for one report use get_report_detail, to find a bug by text use search_reports.' Also lists optional filters for narrow usage.

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