get_votes

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure. 'Get votes' only implies a read operation and does not state what is returned, whether permissions are required, or whether the result is a count or list of voters.

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 definition is short but under-specified. The terse phrase 'Get votes' does not earn conciseness credit because it omits essential context rather than efficiently conveying it.

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 single parameter is documented, but there is no output schema and no description of the return value, so an agent cannot predict what the tool will produce. The sibling list shows related vote operations, yet the description does not clarify this tool's role among them.

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%, with issueIdOrKey described as 'The ID or key of the issue.' The description adds no parameter-level meaning, so the baseline score 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 is exactly the tool name, 'Get votes', with no elaboration on what resource is being retrieved or for which entity. It identifies a verb and a resource but is tautological and indistinguishable from a generic votes endpoint.

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?

No guidance is provided about when to use this tool versus related siblings such as add_vote or remove_vote. There is no mention of preconditions, alternatives, or the issue-level context implied by the issueIdOrKey parameter.

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