get-test-case-issues

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

With no annotations, the description must convey behavior. It indicates a fetch operation with no side effects, but does not disclose any authentication needs, rate limits, or response format. For a simple read, this is minimally adequate but lacks depth.

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, clear sentence with no redundant or unnecessary words. It front-loads the verb and core object, then provides a clarifying example. Efficient and well-structured.

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), the description covers the essential purpose. However, it could be slightly improved by hinting at the response structure, such as 'returns a list of issue links'.

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% for the single parameter 'id', which the description does not elaborate beyond the schema's 'Test case ID'. No additional meaning is added, meeting the baseline but not exceeding it.

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 it retrieves issue links for a specific test case, using a specific verb and resource. The inclusion of 'e.g. Jira issues' clarifies the type of links, making the purpose precise and distinct from write operations like 'set-test-case-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?

The description implies a read operation but does not explicitly guide when to use this tool over alternatives like 'set-test-case-issues'. No context is provided for prerequisites or exclusions, leaving the agent to infer usage from the name.

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