jira_link_create

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

Describes return format 'Returns YAML `{status: ok}`' and explains dry_run behavior: 'Set `dry_run: true` to preview the request... without creating the link.' Also notes it mirrors a known command. No annotations, so description fully covers behavioral aspects.

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?

Four sentences, around 80 words, front-loaded with purpose, no redundancy. Every sentence adds value: purpose, examples, alternative, return, dry_run, mirror command.

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?

Without output schema, description explains return format. Covers all critical aspects: what it does, parameters, return, dry run, alternative, and reference to listing types. Complete for an AI agent.

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 provides descriptions, but description adds semantic clarity: explains inward as source and outward as target with example 'for `Blocks`, the issue doing the blocking / being blocked'. Also explains dry_run and link_type referencing another tool.

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 action: 'Create a typed link between two JIRA issues' with specific examples like 'Blocks', 'Relates'. It distinguishes from sibling tool 'jira_link_parent' for hierarchy, ensuring no confusion.

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?

Explicitly tells when to use an alternative: 'To set hierarchy (Epic → Story / Story → Sub-task) use `jira_link_parent` instead.' Also advises listing link types with `jira_link_types`.

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