atlassian_auth_status

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

No annotations provided, so description carries full burden. Discloses read-only nature, returns boolean flags only, never includes secrets, returns URL verbatim, checks local config only, outputs YAML.

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?

Concise, well-structured, front-loaded with main purpose, then details. Every sentence adds value.

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?

No output schema, but description fully explains return value (boolean flags, no secrets, YAML format) and behavior (no API call). Complete for a zero-parameter tool.

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?

No parameters; schema coverage is 100%. Description states 'Takes no arguments,' which reinforces the schema but adds no additional meaning beyond 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?

Clear verb+resource: 'Report which Atlassian credential scopes have credentials configured.' Distinct from sibling tools like `datadog_auth_status` and explicitly compares with `omni-dev atlassian auth status`.

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?

Explicitly states when to use (check local config) and when not (does not call API, unlike alternative command). Also mentions no arguments needed.

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