Compose Jira Update

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

With no annotations provided, the description must disclose behavior, but it does not. It doesn't say whether the tool posts to Jira, requires authentication, has side effects, or merely generates text. The user is left completely in the dark about consequences.

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, but it is under-specified rather than concise. It omits essential details about parameters, behavior, and output. The brevity does not serve the agent's need for actionable information.

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?

The tool has 3 parameters, no annotations, no output schema, and sibling tools, yet the description provides almost no context. It fails to explain the output, side effects, parameter relationships, or how this fits into the delivery workflow.

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 0%, and the description mentions no parameter names or meanings. The schema only provides types, so the description must compensate, but it adds nothing about runId, transition, or mergeRequestUrl.

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 ('render') and resource ('a Jira update'), but the noun 'update' is ambiguous—it could mean a comment, a status transition, or something else. It does not explicitly distinguish this from sibling tools, though the names suggest different purposes.

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 condition 'after a real GitLab merge request exists' implies a usage context, but there is no guidance on when to use this tool versus the sibling tools 'prepare_delivery' or 'finalize_delivery'. No exclusions or alternatives are mentioned.

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