search_issues

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

The readOnlyHint annotation already declares this a safe read operation. The description adds no behavioral context beyond that—no pagination behavior, rate limits, authentication needs, or result characteristics. It neither contradicts nor enriches the annotations.

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 single sentence is concise but severely under-specified for a 4-parameter search tool. It is not padded, but it omits necessary information rather than earning its brevity through completeness.

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. However, the description is far too sparse for a search tool with 4 parameters at 0% schema coverage and no usage guidance. It leaves the agent without critical invocation details.

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% for all four parameters. The description mentions 'query language' but does not explain the query syntax, nor does it clarify what 'page', 'per_page', or 'fields' control. It fails to compensate for the complete lack of parameter documentation.

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?

States a specific verb ('Найти') and resource ('задачи') plus the query language context, so the agent can tell it searches issues. It does not explicitly differentiate from sibling search tools like search_users, but the resource is clear.

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?

Provides no when-to-use guidance, no alternatives, and no exclusions. The agent must infer that this is for searching issues rather than fetching a specific issue via get_issue or listing via other tools.

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