jira_link_remote_create

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

Despite no annotations, description explains key behaviors: reusing global_id updates rather than duplicating, dry_run mode, and return value structure. Does not mention permissions or error handling, but covers main mutation semantics.

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 sentences with clear purpose, followed by concise optional parameter descriptions and return value. Every sentence is necessary and well-placed. No fluff.

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?

Covers purpose, parameters, return value, and dry_run. Missing details on error handling and idempotency, but overall sufficient for an agent to use correctly given the 7 parameters and no output schema.

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%, but description adds value by grouping parameters into required vs optional, explaining the global_id reuse behavior, and highlighting dry_run. Adds meaning beyond the schema entries.

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 'Add a remote (external URL) link to a JIRA issue' with specific verb and resource, distinguishing from sibling tools like jira_link_create (which links JIRA issues internally) and jira_link_remote_list/delete.

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?

Provides clear usage context: required fields (url, title), optional parameters with behavior (global_id updates existing link, dry_run preview). Does not explicitly state when not to use it, but purpose is well-defined.

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