jira_version_release

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries full burden. It discloses the return format ('Returns YAML {status: ok}') and client-side validation for release_date. It implies a state-changing operation ('mark as released') but does not mention permissions, idempotency, or irreversible side effects. The CLI mirror gives a hint but doesn't expand on behavior.

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 compact and front-loaded with the primary purpose. Every sentence provides distinct value: function, parameter detail, return format, and CLI mirror. No redundant or filler content.

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 tool with 2 parameters and no output schema, the description covers purpose, parameter usage, return value, and a CLI equivalent. It lacks explicit error handling or side-effect details, but given the low complexity, it is reasonably complete.

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 description coverage is 100% for both parameters. The description repeats the version_id source and release_date format, essentially echoing the schema. It does not add new semantic meaning beyond clarifying that version_id comes from jira_version_list, which the schema already states.

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 tool's function: 'Mark a JIRA project version as released.' It specifies the required input (version_id from jira_version_list) and distinguishes it from sibling tools like jira_version_rename, jira_version_archive, and jira_version_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?

The description provides clear context: you need a version_id from jira_version_list, and release_date is optional. However, it does not explicitly mention when not to use this tool or list alternatives. The CLI mirror reference ('omni-dev atlassian jira version release') offers some orientation.

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