jira_get_issue

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

The annotations already declare this is a read-only, idempotent, non-destructive, open-world operation. The description adds that the result includes description and comments, but does not cover pagination, comment limits, auth expectations, or error behavior. This is somewhat useful context beyond annotations, but not rich behavioral disclosure.

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?

It is a single front-loaded sentence with no wasted words. The core action and returned content are stated immediately.

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 read-only tool with complete schema parameter coverage and strong annotations, this is nearly sufficient. Since no output schema exists, the description should arguably say more about the shape of the returned issue beyond description and comments, but it covers the essential call semantics.

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 description coverage is 100%, so all four parameters are already documented in the schema. The description clarifies that the issue is fetched 'by key', which maps to issue_key, but adds no syntax or format details beyond the schema's example ENG-123.

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 states a specific verb and resource: get a single Jira issue by key. The phrase 'single ... by key' implicitly distinguishes it from search/list siblings, but it does not explicitly name an alternative such as jira_search_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?

It implies the tool is used when an issue key is known, but gives no explicit when-to-use guidance, prerequisites, or exclusions. It also does not mention when to prefer jira_search_issues or other Jira siblings.

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