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 that the tool marks a version as released (write operation), mentions client-side validation for release_date, and specifies the return format. However, it omits behavioral details such as idempotency, error handling, or whether the action is reversible.

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: first explains core function, second specifies return format and a mirror reference. No wasted words, but slightly more structure (e.g., bullet points) could improve scanning.

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?

Given the tool's simplicity (2 params, no output schema, no nested objects), the description covers the essential functionality and return format. It doesn't discuss edge cases or validations beyond client-side, but is adequate for selecting and invoking the tool correctly.

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%, and the description adds context: version_id is clarified as coming from jira_version_list, and release_date format is specified as YYYY-MM-DD with client-side validation. This adds meaning beyond the schema field descriptions.

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 verb 'Mark as released' and the resource 'JIRA project version', identified by version_id from jira_version_list. This distinguishes it from sibling tools like jira_version_create or jira_version_archive.

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 implies that the version_id comes from jira_version_list, suggesting a prerequisite, but does not explicitly state when to use or avoid this tool (e.g., if the version is already released, or if there are permissions needed). No alternative tools are mentioned.

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