jira_component_update

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

No annotations provided. Description lacks behavioral details: permissions, idempotency, error handling, rate limits, or side effects. Only mentions return format (YAML {status: ok}) and CLI mirror.

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 concise sentences covering action, fields, source of ID, requirement, return format, and CLI equivalence. No 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?

Provides return format and ID source. Lacks behavioral details but sufficient for a simple update tool with clear schema. Adequate given no output schema and few parameters.

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 coverage is 100% with descriptions. Description adds value by explaining 'supply at least one field' and instructing to get component_id from jira_component_list, enhancing schema meaning.

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?

Clearly states verb (update), resource (JIRA component), and specific fields (name, description). Distinguishes from siblings like jira_component_create by specifying update action and requiring component_id from list.

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?

Specifies that component_id must come from jira_component_list and that at least one field (name/description) must be supplied. Does not explicitly state when to use vs alternatives, but context is clear.

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