atlassian_auth_status

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

With no annotations, the description fully discloses behavior: returns boolean presence flags only, never includes secrets, returns instance URL verbatim, is read-only, and output is YAML. This provides excellent transparency.

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 extremely concise and front-loaded with the primary purpose in the first sentence. Three sentences cover all essential information without waste.

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?

Given zero parameters, no output schema, and no annotations, the description is complete: it explains the tool's purpose, output contents, security considerations, read-only nature, and output format.

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 zero parameters, and the description correctly notes none are needed. Baseline score of 4 is appropriate as no additional parameter information is necessary.

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 reports which Atlassian credential scopes have credentials configured, uses a specific verb (report) and resource (credential scopes), and distinguishes itself from sibling tools like 'datadog_auth_status' by focusing on Atlassian credentials.

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 for checking credential configuration before performing other Atlassian operations but lacks explicit when-to-use or when-not-to-use guidance compared to alternatives. Clear context is provided without exclusions.

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