jira_component_create

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden. It discloses the return format (YAML) but does not mention side effects (creating a component), permission requirements, error behavior, or that it is a mutation. This is minimal transparency for a write operation.

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 concise, using two sentences to state the purpose, list parameters, and mention the return format. The 'Mirrors omni-dev...' phrase adds context without clutter, making it efficient and front-loaded.

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 create tool with a complete schema and no output schema, the description adequately covers purpose, parameters, and return format. It lacks safety annotations, but for a create operation, the intent is clear. The description is sufficient for an agent to select and invoke the tool correctly.

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 schema describes all three parameters with full coverage (100%). The description only lists parameter names without adding extra meaning, so it does not compensate beyond the schema. Baseline 3 is appropriate since the schema alone provides sufficient semantics.

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 creates a JIRA project component and lists the required parameters (project, name, optional description). It also mentions the return format (YAML), distinguishing it from sibling CRUD tools by explicitly being a create operation.

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 through the verb 'create' and the resource, but provides no explicit guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives like jira_component_update. It does not mention prerequisites, exclusions, or when not to use it.

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