jira_dev

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

The description explicitly states 'Read-only,' which is a key behavioral trait. It also mentions the output format (YAML) and contents. Since there are no annotations, these disclosures are sufficient for this simple fetch 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 a single sentence plus 'Read-only,' conveying all necessary information with no superfluous words. It is front-loaded with the purpose.

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 read-only tool with one parameter, the description is complete: it specifies input (key), output content (PRs, branches, repos), and format (YAML). No output schema is provided, but the description adequately covers what the agent can expect.

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 only parameter 'key' has full schema description coverage (100%). The description repeats the example format from the schema but adds no additional semantics beyond what the schema already provides.

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 it fetches development status for a JIRA issue, specifying the output includes linked pull requests, branches, and repositories in YAML format. This distinguishes it from sibling tools like jira_read or jira_search which retrieve other issue data.

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 indicates usage by providing the issue key and gives an example. It implies this tool is for obtaining development-related information (PRs, branches, repos), which helps differentiate it from other Jira tools. However, it does not explicitly state when not to use it or list alternatives.

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