jira_search_issues

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

The readOnlyHint annotation already tells the agent this is a safe read operation. The description adds no behavioral context beyond that: it says nothing about pagination defaults, result limits, permission requirements, or whether the search is bounded by any scope. For a search tool with annotations covering safety, this is a minimal contribution.

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, front-loaded sentence with zero filler. It is appropriately sized for a tool whose parameters and return shape are already well documented in structured fields.

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?

An output schema exists, so return values need not be explained, and the input schema is fully documented. However, the tool sits among many Jira search and listing siblings, and the description provides no routing guidance to distinguish this generic JQL search from board, sprint, backlog, or assignable-user searches. That gap is significant for correct tool selection.

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 the schema already documents jql, fields, startAt, and maxResults in detail. The description adds no parameter-level meaning beyond what the schema provides, so the baseline of 3 applies.

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 names a specific verb and resource: 'Search issues', and adds the method 'with JQL'. This is clear enough for an agent to know it performs a JQL-based issue search, but it does not distinguish itself from several close siblings such as jira_get_board_issues, jira_get_sprint_issues, or jira_list_backlog.

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?

There is no explicit guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives. The phrase 'with JQL' implies that it is the generic query-based search, but the description never states that it is preferred for arbitrary JQL or that board/sprint/backlog tools should be used for scoped searches.

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