get_ticket_fields

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

No annotations are provided, so the description must disclose behavioral traits. It indicates a read-only operation via the verb 'Retrieve' and clarifies scope with 'all' and 'built-in and custom,' but does not mention any rate limits, permissions, pagination, or other notable behaviors. This is minimal but not contradictory.

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 sentence that immediately states the purpose and scope. It is front-loaded with the action and resource and contains no redundant or extra content.

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 has no parameters and an output schema exists (to describe return values), the description covers the essential purpose and scope. It could include a note about how the field definitions might be used, but for a simple getter it is sufficiently complete.

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 tool has no parameters; the input schema is empty. Therefore, the description correctly does not add parameter semantics. The baseline score for zero parameters is 4.

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 'Retrieve all ticket field definitions (built-in and custom).' This clearly specifies the action (retrieve) and the resource (ticket field definitions), distinguishing it from sibling tools like get_tickets or get_ticket_by_id that retrieve ticket records. The scope is also explicit with 'all' and 'built-in and custom.'

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 provides no explicit guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives. It only describes what it does, leaving the usage to be implied: if an agent needs ticket field definitions, this tool is appropriate. No alternatives or exclusions are mentioned.

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