pylon_search_issues_by_status

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

Discloses automatic mapping of status names to state+tag combinations, which is nontrivial behavior not evident from schema. With no annotations, the description takes on behavioral disclosure burden. No mention of auth or rate limits, but appropriate for a read-only search.

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?

Two sentences, no superfluous words. First sentence defines purpose and examples; second provides usage guidance and behavioral hint. 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?

For a simple search tool with two parameters and no output schema, description covers purpose, usage guidance, and key behavior. Lacks details on return format or ordering but is generally complete for the tool's complexity.

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 already describes both parameters (status and limit) with 100% coverage, so baseline is 3. Description adds context about custom statuses and mapping, but does not significantly enhance understanding of limit. Overall adds marginal value.

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?

Description clearly states the action (search issues) and criterion (by status name), includes examples of custom statuses, and distinguishes from sibling tool pylon_search_issues. Verb+resource are specific and unique.

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?

Explicitly tells when to use this tool (search by single status) and when to use alternative (pylon_search_issues for multi-filter). Provides clear context for tool selection.

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