getCustomFields

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

No annotations are provided, so the description must carry the full burden of behavioral disclosure. It only states 'List', implying a safe read operation, but does not mention whether the output is paginated, filtered, or ordered. Critical behavioral details like the required 'format' parameter are omitted.

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 short sentence, making it very concise and easy to parse. However, the conciseness comes at the expense of necessary detail, so it is efficient but not optimally informative.

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 that the tool has a required nested parameter and no output schema, the description is critically incomplete. It does not explain what custom fields are, what the output looks like, or how the format parameter affects the response. More context is needed for proper use.

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 should explain parameters. It does not mention the 'format' parameter at all, leaving the agent unaware of its existence or purpose. The parameter is required and has an enum, but the description provides no guidance on how to use it.

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 the verb 'List' and the resource 'custom fields', making the primary action unambiguous. However, it lacks any detail about what 'custom fields' refers to (e.g., issue custom fields, project custom fields), leaving room for ambiguity. Among siblings, it is distinct as the only tool for listing custom fields.

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 guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives, no prerequisites, and no exclusions. While it is clear that this tool lists custom fields, there is no mention of context such as when it is appropriate or what to do if custom fields are not configured.

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