List ticket actions

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries full burden. It mentions the action list is scoped to the authenticated user and returns a map, but omits details about permissions requirements, error conditions (e.g., invalid ticket_id), or whether the list could be empty.

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?

Two sentences, no filler. The first sentence states the core purpose, the second links to a related sibling. Every word earns its place.

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 simple list tool with one parameter and an output schema, the description covers the output format and workflow integration. It is nearly complete but lacks parameter documentation, which is a minor gap given the tool's simplicity.

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?

The input schema has a required ticket_id with no description (0% schema coverage). The description does not elaborate on ticket_id format, source, or constraints, leaving the agent with no additional guidance beyond the schema.

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 tool lists ticket actions the authenticated user may apply, returning a map of id to display name. It distinguishes from sibling apply_ticket_action by noting the ids are its input.

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 as a precursor to apply_ticket_action, providing a natural workflow. However, it does not explicitly state when to use this tool over siblings like list_ticket_steps or get_ticket, nor does it mention exclusion criteria.

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