jira_field_list

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

Discloses that it returns YAML, which is helpful. However, no annotations are provided, and the description does not mention permissions, rate limits, or any side effects. For a read-only list operation, this is acceptable but not thorough.

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?

Very concise: two sentences with no redundant information. The purpose is front-loaded, and each 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?

Does not explain the YAML structure or what fields contain; no details about return values. Given many sibling JIRA tools, it lacks differentiation context. Adequate for a simple listing tool but could be richer.

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 a clear description for the 'search' parameter. The description adds 'optionally filtered by name substring', which mirrors the schema but does not provide additional semantic context beyond what is already in the schema.

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?

Description clearly states 'List JIRA field definitions' with a specific verb and resource. It also mentions optional filtering by name substring and return format (YAML), and provides a reference to the equivalent CLI command, making the purpose unmistakable.

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?

No explicit guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives like jira_field_options or jira_read. The description only states what it does without context on when it's appropriate or not.

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