jira_version_archive

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

With no annotations, description carries full burden. It mentions return format but omits behavioral details like reversibility, effects on active issues, or required permissions. The 'Mirrors' line implies a CLI command but adds little transparency.

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?

Three short sentences, no redundancy, front-loaded with the core purpose. Every sentence serves a purpose: action, return format, and provenance hint.

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?

Adequate for a simple tool with one parameter. Covers action, return, and parameter source. However, lacks behavioral context (side effects, irreversibility) and does not contrast with sibling version tools, given 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 meaningful context by specifying the parameter comes from `jira_version_list`, which helps the agent locate the correct ID. This adds value beyond the schema's description.

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 the action ('Archive') and the resource ('JIRA project version'), with explicit reference to the identifier source (`jira_version_list`), distinguishing it from sibling version tools like delete or release.

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 vs alternatives. Only implies that the version_id must come from `jira_version_list`, but lacks context on prerequisites or when archiving is appropriate compared to other version operations.

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