jira_create_issue

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

Annotations already indicate readOnlyHint=false, so the agent knows it's a write operation. The description adds that creation requires project_key and summary, and extra_fields can be used. It does not disclose any additional behavioral traits (e.g., rate limits, duplicate handling), but for a simple create tool, this is adequate.

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 two sentences, front-loaded with the purpose, and wastes no words. It is efficiently 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 create tool with a rich input schema and existing annotations, the description covers the core purpose and required fields. However, it omits mention of default values (e.g., issue_type defaults to 'Task') or the response format, which could aid agent understanding. It is minimally 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?

Schema description coverage is 0%, so the description must compensate. It highlights required fields and the role of extra_fields, but the schema already describes each parameter. The added value is minimal, so baseline 3 is appropriate.

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 'Create a new Jira issue', using a specific verb and resource. The name and description distinguish it from sibling tools like jira_get_issue and jira_update_issue.

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 identifies required fields (project_key, summary) and mentions extra_fields, giving context on usage. However, it does not explicitly contrast with alternative tools like updating or transitioning issues, but the purpose is generally clear.

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