Add Label to Epic

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries full behavioral burden. It discloses the 'full set' behavior, indicating a replace operation, but fails to mention required confirmation ('confirm' parameter), dry-run behavior, permissions, reversibility, or side effects.

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 no redundant words. Every word contributes to the core message, making it highly concise.

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 mutating tool with four parameters, no annotations, and no output schema, this description is incomplete. It omits crucial details about the confirm safety gate, dry-run behavior, and does not explain the destructive nature of replacing the full label set.

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 only 50%, and the description adds little beyond what is in the schema. It reinforces 'full list' for label_ids but provides no explanation for epic_id, confirm, or dry_run, leaving half the parameters undocumented.

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 action ('Add a label') and the target resource ('Shortcut epic'), and specifies the method ('by providing the full set of label IDs'). This distinguishes it from sibling tools like 'add_story_label' and 'update_epic'.

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 implies usage context: to set the label set on an epic, you provide the full list of label IDs. However, it does not explicitly state when to use this tool versus alternatives like 'update_epic' or 'add_story_label', nor does it provide any exclusions.

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